It is a common belief that swords were useless in war, or hardly used at all (or only used when the situation was not ideal). And these are not strawmen! I have personally seen all of these things (and more) said! Even the some of the most generous claims are still quite harsh and backhanded ("only good for duels", "great civilian weapon", etc.). But the fact of the matter is, the sword was a weapon of war, carried for centuries, sometimes in areas where they didn't have refined metallurgy either! So how could that be if swords were useless against armor and defeated entirely by reach? I have gathered up quite the collection for this one over the years (which I posted on the internet before, so you may find them out there), so enjoy!
The Reach Disadvantage
These ideas regarding the sword are largely based on (poor) logic (and HEMA tests done by those who rarely train with mixed weapons; or hardly use spears at all, and fencing skills naturally transfer from one weapon to another), so therefore, this will part will mostly be logic; largely the theorike of my own rather than the practike of the ancients. If you want to get to the quotes, they will be mostly further down, and if you are smart enough, you will be able to form a good opinion solely on the quotes. So feel free to skip the logic if you wish to!
The sword is generally short (the great two-handed ones being the exception rather than the rule), and when compared to longer polearms, the difference is obviously clear. But hafted arms are not without their disadvantages either! For because their haft is made of wood, they are more fragile than swords; and owing to their length, they very easily become overlong. None of these things contradict the initial presumptions, that swords were only used in less-than-ideal situations or rarely used, except that if combat was but a game of reach (or a game of chicken, wherein "morale" decided all affairs), then why would the sword ever be carried at all, let alone used? Only the first ranks do most (obviously not all) of the "initial" combat (I am referring to the time before the ranks break; plenty of combat occurs afterwards), even pikemen at most will only have 5 or so ranks at max aiding in combat, so if one of the front ranker's weapons broke, he could likely retire under the cover his comrades and retrieve a new weapon (or if he could not retire due to the density of the formation, he would die anyways, since reach decides all). And if reach was the most important thing, then the threat of an opponent closing would not be very high as the impetus to do so would not be either.
So with this logical argument, we can be sure that swords were never used in combat, at least against sane opponents who valued their own lives; or opponents who were smart and knew reach decided all. But of course that is obviously not true (as I will prove), so how can reach be so important, yet swords were still used? Because closing with the opponent, and then creating a gap for one's comrades to enter in was important for victory! For when the pell mell (that is, the chaotic melee, usually used in reference for the foot; melee being reserved for the horse) starts to become rare for the pikemen in Europe, the said pikemen start to stop carrying swords.
"It is both a grief, and a shame, to see how few Pikemen, in most of our ordinary Companies, have Swords by their sides, and the Musketeers seldom any; when a man looks not like a Soldier, without a Sword; and 'tis the Sword which does the chiefest Execution, either in the Battel, or after the Routing of an Enemy: The Greeks and Romans made it ignominious for a Soldier to lose his Sword, even in Fight; I wish we would make it the like for a Soldier to go to Fight without his Sword, or indeed so much as to see a Soldier without his Sword."
- Roger Boyle, A treatise of the art of war, 1677
Roger Boyle was a salty old veteran, who served in Ireland during the English Civil War, so his experience 20-30 years prior to writing giving to his opinion might very well be due to a shift in military practice; if you may consider this to be such a short period of time for such a drastic change, then you should know halberd and other short arms fell out of use within the battle/battalion of pikes within a similar time range; the authors who remarked upon it considered this due to the lack of pell mells, as one side usually gave way long before then, so the initial encounter was what decided the fights (and having more pikes is better for the clash).
"As few [halberds or bills] as might be, for in their steds farre better were so many armed Pikes, in mine opinion, considering that in set Battailes when men come to the shock, or push of the Pike, they sarrie close together, and the first three, fiue, or seuen rankes do beare the chiefe brunt; and entred so farre, men buckle Pell-Mell, close together, by which time commonlie the one side reculeth or swayeth, and a battell once reculing doth not lightlie hold long, so that ere the Center of the Battaill be touched one side must fall to disaray; men once disordered, they commonly fall to rout, the rout is pursued with slaughter and ruine. Against horse the like reasons are to be made: thus either to offend or defend, farre better is the Pike, then either Bill, or Halbard.
[...]
For who doth not know that if the enemy be like to be victor, the armed pikes will yeeld backward as they feele themselues distressed, so as when the pikes are in such maner crashed and clustred together, that they can no longer charge and push with their pikes, then will the throng or presse in the center be so great, that the halberds and bils shall haue little roome to strike; nay short swords will hardly haue rome at that instant either to thrust or to strike. I would thinke daggers would do more execution at that time, and in that presse vntill one side fall to flight: so I see no reason at all for halberds or bills to haue place in a battell or stand of pikes: Besides the vnseemely shew they make either by themselues in the center, or mingled among pikes."
- Robert Barret, The theorike and practike of moderne vvarres, 1598
Here we may see Robert Barret considered short weapons, such as bills, halberds, etc., as unprofitable amongst the pikes. And where in the early 16th century they were important (for often they held the third, fourth, or fifth rank; Philippe de Cleves in the early 16th century in his Instruction de toutes manieres de Guerroyer tant par terre que par mer prescribed two ranks of halberds after four ranks of pikes), by the 17th century, they were largely left to the protection of the shot (and often for the defense of the ensign, against the advice of Barret; in very low numbers, it should be said), or other actions outside of the stand of pikes.
"If any shall question why in this A, B, C, I set downe postures onely for two weapons, let him bee pleased to receiue this for satisfaction, all short weapons as Targateers, Billmen, or Holbardeers, are in these times meerely out of vse..."
- I. T. Gent., The A, B, C, of armes, 1616
But just over 10 years prior to Robert Barret's writing, we read of halberds, slaugh swords, and whatnot being commonly used in the manner contrary to his prescription, and you may read a couple such here.
The only logical conclusion, therefore, is that all short arms, including swords, fell out of use due to the lessening of the pell mells (whether duration, importance, or actual occurences); ergo, when pell mells were something important to consider, swords were both not only just carried, but used and useful. And the sources agree with such a position, although I must finish this discussion on reach first.
Reach, although certainly advantageous, is not the sole determiner of combat. And especially that of combat on the field when arrayed and wearing any sort of armor; for when one is arrayed, movement is constrained (even with three feet allowance to the flanks and rear that many orders had, although I will cover that another day); and armor makes reach not so overwhelming. In fact, full armor often encourages one to move forward and to fight with their weapons held short (whether half sword or half axe), although we can probably say not always. But even lighter armor likewise prevents reach from being so dominating, as only more powerful blows will do any significant harm to maille or padded armor; and points are harder to be precise with the further away from the lead hand they are, and therefore there is a greater chance of missing. This is not to say you cannot accurately thrust at the throat with a pike, only that utilizing its full reach is riskier in such a case; and when we assume they will defend themselves, blows partially warded, where they might have been lacerated if they were without arms, the blow might become harmless if they only meet steel.
"Therefore, one who does not know how to wrestle should learn to carry the [poll]axe at a distance or turned aside, and extend it to touch the adversary at a suitable time. For if it comes to close grips, the good wrestler prevails. But the right hand should hold the dagger or the shaft of the axe, and the left should be intent on seizing or capturing the other’s weapon, or on throwing down the enemy himself. And here one is not concerned about throwing our axe into the neck or legs, or between the arms, of the enemy. And if we are in armour, we must use shrewdness, to strike the parts which are the least covered, such as the visor and armpit or under the arm, and the navel and the groin and the feet. But against those who want to come to the half-axe to fight and turn ours aside, we should walk at a distance, throwing our blows, withdrawing with maximum speed, or directing our body sideways, or returning on the enemy, when an opportunity presents itself there. When he himself comes with half the shaft or axe in front, we extend our weapon and turn aside our body, he himself comes to enter on the point of our weapon. Nevertheless, note that it is to be understood that one should fight in this way only when unarmed with defensive weapons, for if we are in white armour we should continuously go forward, or at least around, so that we by no means allow ourselves be driven back by the adversary, and for this the axe must be caught at the middle."
- Pietro Monte, Exercitiorum Atque Artis Militaris Collectanea, 1509
"When the captain is valiant in his limbs, he can break through among the first, and open a place through the point where he breaks through, in such a way that all his men follow him with agreeable and deliberate spirit. But if the captain withdraws and is so weak that he falls in the first conflict without a blow, or does not suffice to personally defeat any of the enemies, the whole of his army will enter the war with a chilled spirit."
- Idem, Exercitiorum Atque Artis Militaris Collectanea, 1509
And although the file-leader in an array has comrades who may succor him in case of being charged by a swordsman who has "bridged the gap", so too does the swordsman have comrades to aid him in his assault! And as the men in the rear are inherently inhibited by the man in front, it is not as easy as "just stab him"; but the threat of the neighboring files being overwhelmed by such an assault is real (if we assume the men behind are keen and follow the file leader). But of course, such an assault might fail due to the difficulty in bridging the gap (many things are easier said than done!); or, the ones with polearms might draw their own swords or daggers and repel them (and we have already established that although it may be a less-than-ideal scenario for the man with the long arm, it is not for the swordsman, who has forced his opponent to give up his weapon!).
"And that there is no precise rule about the length of weapons is fittingly shown, since he who bears those a little longer has an advantage on the enemy, but not for when they are very closely joined, where one cannot move the arm freely to bring a blow.
[...]
... if both fighters know little, a weapon-length [difference] of three or four fingers more or less is of little concern, for they always enter to strike with the middle of the sword, and with a deliberate blow. But those who embrace great art [in arms] have a great advantage or security by one finger's weapon-length. And if they throw a point without the arms being abandoned, they go back to recollect the weapon to themselves and to strike many other blows. If one person is skilled and holds a weapon which is slightly longer, while the other has had little teaching and has a weapon shorter than the enemy's, the advantage to him who knows is great, and having art, even though a shorter weapon is taken hold of, a man can defend himself competently, especially against those who have little knowledge."
- Pietro Monte, Exercitiorum Atque Artis Militaris Collectanea, 1509
And Pietro Monte fully understands the power of reach; the length he prescribes for the pollaxe is about 7 feet long! He is quite realistic, but likewise note that he does not portray reach as something undefeatable; to him, it is a matter of skill (and particularly the skill of facing long weapons).
And further, regarding skill, people of "equal skill" do not always completely match one another: often one will be better at certain things than their opponent. One may be better with a sword and the other may be better with a spear; and likewise, one may be better with a sword facing a spear than his opponent is with a spear facing a sword, or the reverse! For there are plenty of techniques that can be applied if the swordsman gets behind the spear's point, just as there are plenty of techniques that allowed the swordsman to get past that point in the first place. But it should be noted that the sword in most places in the pre-modern period was the weapon carried everywhere; and because of such, many would likely have more experience with a sword than with a polearm, even if they would customarily use their polearm first on the field of battle. Those well practiced in all skills pertaining to the art of fencing, the "martial classes", would therefore have the greatest advantage in combat because of this. But that same skill would likewise lessen (but not remove!) the drastic effect of reach seen in so many tests, as said by Monte.
And sometimes I have read that swords are better in duels than spears. I am unsure where this idea came from, since one can step anywhere they wish and move their weapon in any way they wish when not constrained by numbers; these things wholly aiding long weapons more than they aid swords or daggers or the sort. And because there are no other opponents that you have to watch out for, any chances for an opening (such as momentarily needing to defend yourself from another man) will be from the man directly opposing you or from your own fault. And although in an ordered formation, there is someone to aid the man with the polearm should someone attempt to close the distance; he is by nature inhibited in the actions he can do because of the man (or men) in front blocks both his vision and his own movements. And because armor is generally not being worn in such a scenario (that is, civilian life), light blows are more dangerous (such as sliding the haft through the lead hand), and the danger of missing is less. The sword is the one carried in the civilian world because it is easy to carry, not because it is most advantageous in that scenario. Perhaps it obvious now why polearms were not allowed to be carried throughout the city.
And to conclude this section, since it is quite long winded; reach is important and advantageous, but it is not the only factor that determines the victor; and its advantages are lessened by the common factors of war (defensive arms being worn and soldiers being in an ordered body). This is not to say the polearm is worse than the sword in battle; only that the sword is greatly important, even if the polearm is often the first weapon used.
With that out of the way, now for the fun parts!
The Sword Amongst the Horse
The horseman especially needs a sidearm; his horse does not perfectly respond to his commands, and the horse itself impedes the actions of the rider. These things make the lance (or other polearms; I will mostly refer to the lance but the problems inhibit all long arms) very often unprofitable. Lances likewise commonly break upon impact, and even with the fact that you can still use the remaining part (at least with speed), when in battle, the initial clash will almost immediately turn into a melee due to the speed of the horses driving the lines forward towards each other. And when charging infantry, the length of the weapon may become hazardous to hold onto as it may be grabbed by the footmen beneath. And so important are these sidearms, that many often carried two or three (the others often being worn at the saddle).
"The lances broken, at the encounter of whom fell to the earth on all sides, many men at arms, and many horses, each began to use with the same ferocity their iron maces, and estocs [stocchi], and other short arms, the horses fighting with kicks, with bites, with shock, no less than the men..."
- Francesco Guicciardini, La Historia di Italia, 1561, Translation by Me
The breaking of lances, and then immediately falling on with their swords and other sidearms is something you will see here a lot. So normal and frequent this transition was, that it transcended time and culture, and likewise it bridged the gap from reality into literary device!*
Monte explicitly writes that estocs are the most used weapon by men at arms when on horseback. So already we have something that directly disproves the idea that swords were rarely or never used.
"Since, when bearers of weapons are armoured in white and heavy armour and fighting on horseback, they use, above all other weapons, what is called stocchi [estoc] in the vernacular..."
- Pietro Monte, Exercitiorum Atque Artis Militaris Collectanea, 1509
The rest of the passage uses this information to explain why a strong horse is necessary for that kind of combat (which I have omitted for obvious reasons). Pietro Monte likewise writes that for war, the cuirass does not need to break as many lances as for jousts, ie., men at arms do not always retrieve new lances after breaking them, or at least not immediately, and thus must fight with sidearms after the first clash.
"And you must hold your lance in your hand and placed in the pouch. And setting off at the gallop, placing your lance in the lance-rest, aim for the enemy’s belly, and once the lance is broken, you shall take hold of the estoc [estoque], which should be strapped onto the left-hand side of the front arçon, secured in place in such a way that when you draw it the scabbard does not come with it. And when fighting with these weapons, strike at the visor and the voids, that is, the belly and the armpits. After you have lost or broken the estoc, you shall take hold of the arming sword [espada de armas], which shall be girded on your left-hand side, and fighting until you have lost or broken it, you shall take hold of the hammer [martillo], which shall be attached to the right-hand side of the belt with its hook. Reaching down, you shall find it, and pulling upwards, the hook will release and, with hammer in hand, you shall do what you can with it until you lose it. And after it is lost, you shall reach behind you and draw the dagger from behind your back.
And you shall grapple with your enemy with all these weapons that you have at your disposal, striking and aiming at the voids, that is, the belly and the armpits, and at the visor, with the estoc or sword and with the hammer in hand, for by wounding the head and the hands he will inevitably surrender."
- Juan Quijada de Reayo, Doctrina del Arte de la Cauallería, 1548
This is from the chapter regarding war. "If you find yourself at war...", so says he.
"The Grand Master began to strike at them with the tip of his lance. Hernando de Monrroy, who was also carrying a lance, did nothing but shove men over the parapet; and in view of the fact that the lance of the Grand Master, Don Alonso de Monrroy, did not last long due to the fact he was being pushed on, because in that area many people had charged, he laid hands on his sword and tossed his adarga shield, which was smashed to pieces, from his arm."
- Alonso de Maldonado, Vida e historia del Maestre de Alcántara don Alonso de Monroy, 1492
"And the knights on both sides, having lost their lances, drew their swords, and they were all tangled with each other, attacking each other so mercilessly that many of them, because they were fighting in such close quarters, were unable to avail themselves of their swords and fought with their daggers."
- Hernando del Pulgar, Crónica de los señores reyes católicos, ~1492
"But when he saw that the knights were filled with German fury – for his exhortation had injected a certain invincible courage in their hearts – he formed his lines and specified precisely which ones were to fight at first, which were to break into the fighting enemy forces from the flank, which ones were to bring help to those in trouble in the fight, while he himself took position where he could bring help with the most highly selected men. And now he moved into the fight against the Romans with raised banners and widely deployed cohorts, placing his hope in God. The archbishop of Cologne, however, armed himself and the garrison of the castle and all his men, a number estimated as 300 well-armed knights, in order to be able to give help under any circumstances, and he remained calmly in the castle until the start of the battle. After the battle had begun and the lances were broken at the first clash of the armies, the fight was carried on with swords, while the archers on both sides obscured the light of day with their arrows as if they were snow flakes. And behold, the archbishop of Cologne, breaking out of the castle with his eager knights, attacked the Romans from the rear and pushed against them courageously, so that they were surrounded on all sides, attacked from front and rear. While the Romans therefore were fighting only with the weight of their mass, Bishop Christian with his men penetrated their battle line from the flank, tore the middle of their formation apart, and covered with blows the enemy that was thus skillfully separated into three groups. After many had been killed and a number taken prisoner, the defeated Romans took to flight and, pursued by their conquerors up to the city, they were cut down in the bloodiest slaughter. After they had called back their knights from this butchery, the bishops returned to the battlefield and spent that night celebrating with the greatest joy."
- Ottonis de Sancto Blasio, Chronici ab Ottone Frisingensi conscripti continuatio, 1209
"Thus with the Turks approaching, [and] the Christians advancing against, with great vigor they fought from here to there: the bow did nothing, the lance very little, the sword the most."
- Radulphus Cadomensis, Gesta Tancredi in expeditione Hierosolymitana, ~1118, Translation by Me
"After a while the Franks, having broken their lances against the bodies of the infidels, started in with their swords. How many bodies fell with their heads cut off and how many could be seen there with some of their limbs slashed, because the rear columns of the army were pushing the front columns onto the swords of their killers!"
- Robertus Monachus, Historia Hierosolymitana, ~1110
"It happened that the battalions were approaching the Germans, who were advancing at the front. They attacked the lord of Karytaina, and the lord of Karytaina, who was one of the bravest knights in the world at that time, gave them a hard fight. At the clash of lances, the lord of Karytaina attacked the duke of Carinthia, one of the noblest and most valiant princes of Germany. The lord of Karytaina struck the duke’s shield so hard, he knocked him and his horse over in a heap. From the fall he sustained, the duke broke his neck and died. Immediately afterward, the lord of Karytaina struck down two more German barons, who were the duke’s relatives. When his lance had broken, he seized his sword and began to inflict so much carnage that all those who saw it were amazed."
- Anonymous, Τὸ χρονικὸν τοῦ Μορέως, The Chronicle of the Morea, ~1310
"And the Lord King was now here, now there, now on the right, now on the left, and fought so hard with his sword that it broke all to pieces. And at once he seized his mace, with which he attacked better than any man in the world. And he approached the count of Nevers, who was chief of that company, and with his mace gave him such a blow on the helmet that he felled him to the ground."
- Ramon Muntaner, Chronica, ~1325
"And the Lord Infante, who knew that they were coming specially for him, gave the first of them such a blow with his lance, that he thrust it right through him, so that he cast him dead to the ground. And then he seized his mace and rushed upon another and gave him such a blow on the helmet he was wearing that his brains issued out of his ears. What shall I tell you? With his mace he cast four men dead to the ground. And then the mace broke and he seized his sword, and cleared such a space for himself that nothing could resist him."
- Idem, Chronica, ~1325
"Many of the French at the first clash fell and were cut down. For they carry shorter lances, therefore they felt the first blows; indeed, the French seemed more suited with the sword, for it is shorter, [and] it is considered [to be] more suitable."
- Alessandro Benedetti, Diaria de bello Carolino, 1496, Translation by Me
"The commander Francesco Gonzaga, acting more as soldier than general, pierced the chest of an enemy with a deadly lance in the first charge, disturbed the ranks, and then fighting keenly with his sword penetrated with much slaughter inside the lines and returned to his men to replace his horse which had been hit. Then Rodolfo, though covered with blood, also encouraged the cavalry and infantry to fight and called upon the men in the name of their ancient courage. For the entire rear line of the French was wavering in fear, and wandering French and Latins joined in hand-to-hand struggle; they became so entangled and drew their swords so readily on both sides that no one could distinguish who was victor and who vanquished, and all were so massed together that arms beat upon arms."
- Idem, Diaria de bello Carolino, 1496
"And the masses together collided, committing to a bloody war. The crashing of lances, the ringing of swords, the sudden clamor of strikes, the cries of the dying, the lamentations of the wounded, [all] heard within the very clash, appearing to disturb the air. For an exceedingly long time they quarreled with swords ringing about their heads, and on both sides, the opposing parties were fighting courageously."
- Johannis de Trokelowe, Annales, ~1330, Translation by Me
"On that same day, while I was with one part of the army locked in battle, I saw a cavalryman charge one of our own horsemen and thrust his spear in our comrade’s horse, killing it. Our man was now fighting on foot on the ground, but I could not make out who he was due to the distance between us. So I spurred my horse on towards him, fearing for his safety once that Frank had speared him. The Frank's quntariya was still stuck in the man’s horse as it lay there dead with its intestines spilling out. The Frank withdrew from him a short distance and, drawing his sword, took his position facing him."
- Usama ibn Munqidh, كتاب الاعتبار, The Book of Contemplation, 1183
"The way these Kanto warriors are, they just ride straight over a dead father or son and keep fighting. The enemy are many and our arrows few. When we run out of them, it will come to swords."
- Anonymous, 保元物語, Hōgen monogatari, ~1320
"We must do what the occasion calls for, said Tadanobu. If the monks attack, I will shoot arrows as fast as I can until my quiver is empty and then rush in among them to fight with my sword. When I finally draw my dagger to kill myself, I will say, 'Although I wanted you to take me for Yoshitsune, I am Satō Shirobyōe, a retainer who borrowed his master's name to demonstrate his loyalty on the field of battle. Show my head to the Lord of Kamakura. If I kill myself that way, nobody can criticize the use of your name'."
- Anonymous, 義経記, Gikeiki, 15th Century
"As the sun made ready to hide itself behind the western mountains, suddenly the sky darkened, the wind blew, a great rain fell, and thunder rumbled as though to destroy the mountain. Trembling with fear, the attackers crowded together under this tree and that, whereupon Taro Saemon-no-jō Nagashige and Kojiro Nagataka, Nawa Matatarō Nagatoshi's younger brothers, sent forth archers on the right and left, who shot them mercilessly. And when the enemy shields wavered, they drew their swords and sprang forward, shouting, Hurrah! They are ours! And they drove back the thousand attackers at the front, so that they fell down to the bottoms of the gorges. No man can tell how many of them perished, pierced by the swords and daggers of their comrades."
- Anonymous, 太平記, Taiheiki, Late 14th Century
"When Niki's force withdrew, one Aiso, a vastly powerful Ise man belonging to the Osaka force rode up alone behind my father. Such was the intensity of the fight that my father never noticed him. Aiso severed the neckplate of Aki-no-Nyudo, who fell from his horse. He then cut away the thirty-six battle arrows carried by Noriuji, there beside Aki-no-Nyudo.
My father turned his mount and attacked with his sword. His helmet shattered, Aiso clung to his horse's neck and brandished his own. He cut both plates of my father's left armguard [kote], then charged into the enemy before him. The fight stopped. Later on, Aiso showed the helmet and cheek guards [hatsuburi] to Tonomura Heizo, an acquaintance of his and a houseman of my father's. What kind of sword does Imagawa have? he asked. I had put this helmet and these cheek plates to the test many a time, but he smashed them and cut my headband [hachimaki], and the wound so stunned me that I withdrew. Thereafter my father named the sword Happa-o, explaining that the incident had involved two hachi. The late Noriuji asked for the sword and armguard, which are now heirlooms. The sword was forged by Kuniyoshi."
- Imagawa Ryoshun, 難太平記, Nantaiheiki, 1402
Noriuji was the older brother of Ryoshun.
"Deserted by his men, Middle Counselor Tomomori, the Commander-in-Chief at Ikuta-no-mori, fled toward the water's edge to to board a rescue vessel, alone save for two companions-his son, the Musashi Governor Tomoakira, and a samurai, Kenmotsu Taro Yorikata. A party of ten riders, members of the Kodama League by the look of them, gave chase with loud yells, holding aloft a banner with a battle-fan emblem. Yorikata, who was a crack archer, sent off a whistling shot that thudded into the neckbone of the foremost rider, the standard bearer, and toppled him from his horse upside down. A warrior who appeared to be the enemy captain tried to ride alongside Tomomori to grapple with him, but Tomoakira got between them, rode up alongside the foe, gripped him with all his strength, crashed with him to the ground, held him down, and cut off his head.
As Tomoakira straightened, the warrior's page fell upon him and cut off his head. Yorikata leaped down onto the page and killed him. Then Yorikata shot all his arrows, drew his sword, and fought, killing many enemies before he was brought down by an arrow to the left knee. He died in battle where he sat."
- Anonymous, 平家物語, Heike Monogatari, Early 14th Century
"If you run into many horsemen as a group, do not fight with them after you entered into the middle of the group, [but rather] move at the edge [of the group] and fight all around [them], if you are equipped with a lance, because one who has a lance cannot perform in the crowd. Narrow places belong to the one who has a sword, only God knows better."
- Anonymous, Munyatu'l-ghuzat, Wish of the Warriors of the Faith, 14th Century
"Khafāja stationed 300 horsemen in ambush and skirmished without any serious engagement. They kept this up for three days but the fighting intensified and they came to close quarters, abandoning lances and exchanging sword blows. As this continued, although both sides were exhausted, Khafāja's fresh ambushers suddenly appeared. 'Ubāda fled and Khafāja were victorious. Twelve 'Ubāda chiefs were slain and several men of Khafaja."
- Ali ibn al-Athir, الكامل في التاريخ, al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, 1231
"When he arrived at al-Khābūr, his force amounted to 5,000. With Jāwulī were 4,000, including Prince Ridwān and some of his troops, although his picked men were in the majority. Jāwulī took advantage of the fact that Qilij Arslān's army was not large and brought him to battle before [the rest of] his troops reached him. They met on 20 Dhū'l-Qa'da [13 July 1107]. Qilij Arslan charged in person and became closely engaged. He severed the standard-bearer's hand and himself reached Jāwulī, to whom he gave a sword-blow which cut his brigandine but without penetrating to his body. Then Jāwulī's men charged and put their enemies to flight, pillaging the baggage and slaughtering the camp-followers."
- Idem, الكامل في التاريخ, al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, 1231
"Muhadhdhab al-Dawla occupied the city and sent out men to bring provisions to his army. The Oghuz appeared to intercept the camels, mules and the supplies, and Muhadhdhab al-Dawla, on hearing that, despatched a detachment of his army to drive them off. They made contact and battle was joined. The Oghuz were numerically superior, so, when this too was reported to Muhadhdhab al-Dawla, he marched to the scene of the battle with his full forces. Each side stood firm against the other and the fighting was very fierce. One of the Oghuz shot an arrow at, and hit, the horse of one of Abu Kalijar's men. Whereupon that cavalryman thrust at him with his lance and struck the Turk's horse. The Turk charged at the cavalryman and struck him a blow that severed his hand. In that state, the cavalryman charged in his turn, struck the Turk with his sword and cut him in two. Both fell to the ground dead, and their mounts were also mortally wounded. No finer exploit of martial valour has ever been recorded."
- Idem, الكامل في التاريخ, al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, 1231
"Tamerlane had also placed some of his men in ambush. He slowly led his army on in the early morning, and as the enemy charged he turned his horse's head back to make them believe that he had fled from them, and, swerving aside from the path of the elephants as though his horses were running away in fear, he made for the area in which he had scattered the iron spines prepared by him. His ruse was effective in deceiving the Indians; they drove the elephants vigorously after him until they trod upon the iron thorns, and as they stepped upon them they recoiled. Tamerlane then wheeled his army against them with the camels, on whose backs the flames were now burning with intense heat while the sparks flew everywhere; their panic became hideous because of the violence with which they were being goaded in the rear. When the elephants saw this they took fright and wheeled about toward the Indian army; and when they felt the harsh spines which Tamerlane had thrown in their course they knelt down, becoming like mountains in the path, and lay on the ground unable to move, while their blood poured out in rivers. At that Tamerlane's men who were in ambush emerged on both sides of the army of India, and Tamerlane then galloped forward with his men. The Indians turned, and the two armies shot at one another with arrows; then they came to close combat, first with lances, then with swords and battle-axes. Each of the armies held its ground for a long time, until finally the army of India was defeated, having lost their prominent leaders and warriors; then the remainder fled, worn out with battle."
- Ibn Taghribirdi, al-Nujum al-zahira fi muluk Misr wa'l-Qahira, 15th Century
"There was a horse belonging to Muhammad b. Maslama called Dhū 1-limma, which was tied to the wall. When Muhriz heard the sound of the horses neigh-ing-he became preoccupied with the wall to which the horse was tied. The women said to him, Are you concerned, oh Muhriz, about this horse, for indeed it is as you see, good and restored, and you could ride it and reach the flag. He saw the flag of the Messenger of God, al-'Uqab, pass by-flying high-as Sa'd carried it. They said: He set out crossing the valley of Qana a and overtook al-Miqdad. Then he came to the people at Hayqa and detained them. They resisted, and they attacked each other for a while with spears. Masada attacked Muhriz and pierced him with a spear and wounded him in his spine. He took the spear of Muhriz, but Muhriz' horse escaped and returned to Ariyyih. When the women and the people of the house saw it, they said, Muhriz has been killed. Some said that Muhriz was on a horse of Ukkāsha b. Mihşan called al-Janāh, and that he fought on it. It was said: He who killed Muhriz b. Nadla was Awthār. Abbād b. Bishr approached and overtook Awthār. The two detained and fought each other until their spears broke. Then they took their swords and Abbād b. Bishr pounced on him and held him tight and then pierced him with a dagger, and killed him."
- Al-Waqidi, Kitab al-Tarikh wa al-Maghazi, 9th Century
"... everyone together shouting and throwing in their yari, [they] clashed [with the enemy] from side to side and front to back [十文字], pursuing in a spiral [巴の字], [both sides] mutually hewing and striking down [one another]. The noise of the tsuba of tachi [太刀の鍔音] [being struck], the cries of arrows, the noise of teppo, [all] resounding [throughout] Heaven and Earth, even in the vast Musashino; a great deal was heard."
- Anonymous, 異本小田原記, I hon Odawara-ki, 17th Century, Translation by Me
"The Turks next encamped in a circle round the Latins, and did not allow them to move out either for foraging or even to lead the beasts of burden or horses to water. The Franks now saw destruction staring them in the face, and with utter disregard of their lives, armed themselves strongly the following day (this was Wednesday) and engaged the enemy in battle. The Turks had them in their power, and therefore no longer fought with spears or arrows, but drew their swords and made the battle a hand-to-hand fight and soon routed the Normans, who retreated to their camp, and sought a counsellor. But the excellent emperor to whom they would not listen when he gave them sensible advice, was not at hand, so they appealed to Raymond and Tzitas for advice, and at the same time enquired whether there was any place under the emperor’s jurisdiction nearby to which they could repair. They actually left their baggage, tents and all the infantry where they were, and rode off as speedily as they could on their horses to the seacoast of the Armenian theme and Paurae. Then the Turks made a sudden descent upon the camp and carried off everything and afterwards pursued and overtook the infantry and annihilated them completely, except for a few whom they captured and carried back to Chorosan as specimens. Such were the exploits of the Turks against the Normans; and Raymond and Tzitas with the few surviving knights reached the capital."
- Anna Komnene, Ἀλεξιάς, "Alexiad", 1148
"The Turks did not attack all together, drawn up regularly into phalanx, but separately and in small groups, standing some distance apart from each other; then he ordered each squadron to attack, charging the enemy with their horses, and to let loose heavy showers of darts. Following upon the Turks came my father Alexius, the author of this strategy, with as many of his scattered men as the occasion warranted. Next, one of the 'Immortals' with Alexius, a hot-headed, venturesome fellow, spurred on his horse, and out-riding the others, dashed at full gallop straight at Bryennius, and thrust his spear with great violence against the latter's breast. Bryennius for his part whipped out his sword quickly from its sheath, and before the spear could be driven home, he cut it in two, and struck his adversary on the collar bone, and bringing down the blow with the whole power of his arm, cut away the man's whole arm, breastplate included.
[...]
As Bryennius' horse was now very weary, and unable either to flee or pursue (in fact, it was pretty well at death's door from continuous coursing), he halted it, and, like some brave athlete, stood ready for the grip, and called a challenge to two highborn Turks. One of these struck at him with his spear, but was not quick enough to give him a heavy blow before receiving a heavier one himself from Bryennius' right hand. For Bryennius with his sword succeeded in cutting off the man's hand, which rolled to the ground, spear and all. The second man leapt off his own horse, and like a panther, darted on to that of Bryennius, and planted himself on its flank, and clung tightly to it, and tried to get on its back. Bryennius kept twisting round like an animal in his endeavours to stab him with his sword. However, he did not succeed, for the Turk behind his back escaped all the blows by bending aside. Therefore, when his right hand was exhausted from only encountering emptiness, and the athlete's strength gave out, he surrendered there and then to the whole body of the enemy."
- Idem, Ἀλεξιάς, "Alexiad", 1148
Obviously, some parts are exaggerated.
"Those who had remained in camp saw a ball of dirt rise into the sky as if from a whirlwind. Although even the most courageous men are accustomed to be thrown into confusion by a sudden and unexpected calamity during battle, nevertheless they snatched up their arms very quickly and boldly met the enemy. Battle was engaged with the greatest vigor. The clash of arms and the cries of the men rose up to the clouds. Lances were broken in the first encounter, so they took to the sword—until, with God carrying the work, the Saxons were turned to flight. Our men had the victory but it was a very bloody one. Because the warriors of the second rank had already gone ahead with the booty, in this battle only nobles were killed: Alexius, his son-in-law Ratibor, Braniš with his brother Slava, and many others. Comes Předa barely escaped death, having lost his foot. The duke’s son was wounded under his right thumb; if the head of the sword in his hand had not blocked the blow, he would have lost his whole hand. This slaughter was committed on 2 July [1086]."
- Cosmas Decanus, Chronica Boemorum, 1225
"The royalists began the prelude to the fight, which they call Justam, as they were skilled in that exercise: but when they saw that the consular party, so it was said, did not attack from a distance with lances, but at close quarters with swords, and broke the king's ranks with violent and determined onset, the earls, to a man, for six of them had entered the conflict, together with the king, consulted their safety by flight."
- Willelmi Malmesbiriensis, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ~1125
Justam meaning "joust", but it is likely, in my opinion, that he is referring to fighting with lances rather than some sort of duel. While the lance gives a great advantage at the onset, as seen here, it is not some impossibility for the sword to defeat it in such a game.*
"... during these preludes [praeludia] [of battle], Robertus de Veteri Ponte, acting without hesitation [haud segniter], adhering to usual manner with the impetus of a vigorous soul and his fiercest horse, he set upon and struck [down] many of them riding in groups [plures illorum gregatim equitantes], and presently, having fractured his lance against one [of the enemy], with grasped [adstricto] sword he again struck others..."
- Galterius Cancellarius, Bella Antiochena, ~1122, Translation by Me
"Then Pero Rodrigues and the squires braced their lances under their arms and, all crying out, For Portugal and Saint George! they launched an attack on the enemy. The commanders, with their men, rode towards them valiantly, calling back, For Castile and Saint James! When the lances clashed together, ten Castilians fell to the ground, and two of the Portuguese. After the lances had been lost they did battle with swords, and attacked each other with spirit."
- Fernão Lopes, Cronica del Rei Dom Joham I, 1443
"So they fought together now, confronting the Saracens first with fierce, stout lances and then, when the lances were done, they drew their swords and went in subtle search of gaps in armour."
- Johannes Cuvelier, La Chanson de Bertrand du Guesclin, ~1380
"There was a sharp and terrible conflict between the soldiers who engaged, and especially also between the leaders. For Pantauchus, who was confessedly the best of the generals of Demetrius for bravery, dexterity, and vigour of body, and had both courage and a lofty spirit, challenged Pyrrhus to a hand-to-hand combat; and Pyrrhus, who yielded to none of the kings in daring and prowess, and wished that the glory of Achilles should belong to him by right of valour rather than of blood alone, advanced through the foremost fighters to confront Pantauchus. At first they fought with spears, then, coming to close quarters, they plied their swords with might and skill. Pyrrhus got one wound, but gave Pantauchus two, one in the thigh, and one along the neck, and put him to flight and overthrew him; he did not kill him, however, for his friends haled him away. Then the Epeirots, exalted by tile victory of their king and admiring his valour, overwhelmed and cut to pieces tile phalanx of the Macedonians, pursued them as they fled, slew many of them, and took five thousand of them alive."
- Plutarch, Βίοι Παράλληλοι, Bíoi Parállēloi, Parallel Lives, Early 2nd Century
"When the forces of Eumenes had crossed the intervening hill and were seen coming on to the attack with a swift and impetuous dash, Craterus was dumbfounded and heaped much abuse upon Neoptolemus for having deceived him about the Macedonians changing sides; but he exhorted his officers to act like brave men, and charged upon the enemy. The first collision was severe, the spears were quickly shattered, and the fighting was done with the swords."
- Idem, Βίοι Παράλληλοι, Bíoi Parállēloi, Parallel Lives, Early 2nd Century
"This objection Alexander removed by bidding them call the month a second Artemisius; and when Parmenio, on the ground that it was too late in the day, objected to their risking the passage, he declared that the Hellespont would blush for shame, if, after having crossed that strait, he should be afraid of the Granicus, and plunged into the stream with thirteen troops of horsemen. And since he was charging against hostile missiles and precipitous positions covered with infantry and cavalry, and through a stream that swept men off their feet and surged about them, he seemed to be acting like a frenzied and foolish commander rather than a wise one. However, he persisted in his attempt to cross, gained the opposite banks with difficulty and much ado, though they were moist and slippery with mud, and was at once compelled to fight pell-mell and engage his assailants man by man, before his troops who were crossing could form into any order. For the enemy pressed upon them with loud shouts, and matching horse with horse, plied their lances, and their swords when their lances were shattered. Many rushed upon Alexander, for he was conspicuous by his buckler and by his helmet's crest, on either side of which was fixed a plume of wonderful size and whiteness. But although a javelin pierced under the joint of his thórakos, he was not wounded; and when Rhoesaces and Spithridates, two Persian commanders, made at him together, he avoided the one, and smote Rhoesaces, who wore a breastplate, with his spear; and when this weapon snapped in two with the blow, he took to his sword. Then, while he was thus engaged with Rhoesaces, Spithridates rode up from one side, raised himself up on his horse, and with all his might came down with a barbarian battle-axe upon Alexander's head. Alexander's crest was broken off together with one of its plumes, and his helmet could barely and with difficulty resist the blow, so that the edge of the battle-axe touched the topmost hair of his head. But while Spithridates was raising his arm again for another stroke, Cleitus, 'Black Cleitus,' got the start of him and ran him through the body with his spear. At the same time Rhoesaces also fell, smitten by Alexander's sword."
- Idem, Βίοι Παράλληλοι, Bíoi Parállēloi, Parallel Lives, Early 2nd Century
"Their opponents also advanced; and first there was a cavalry action on the extreme wings between the troops of the advance guards in which the men of Demetrius had much the better of it. But after a little, when Ptolemy and Seleucus had ridden around the wing and charged upon them more heavily with cavalry drawn up in depth, there was severe fighting because of the zeal of both sides. In the first charge, indeed, the fighting was with spears, most of which were shattered, and many of the antagonists were wounded; then, rallying again, the men rushed into battle at sword's point, and, as they were locked in close combat, many were slain on each side. The very commanders, endangering themselves in front of all, encouraged those under their command to withstand the danger stoutly; and the horsemen upon the wings, all of whom had been selected for bravery, vied with each other since as witnesses of their valour they had their generals, who were sharing the struggle with them."
- Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica, ~35 B.C.
"And now, having plunged into the midst of the Persians, although surrounded on all sides, they were defending themselves valiantly; but being crowded together and, as it were, joined man to man, they were not able to move [vibare] their spears [tela], and as soon as these were hurled, they met one another and were entangled, so that a few fell upon the enemy with a light and ineffective stroke, but more dropped harmless to the ground. Forced therefore to join battle hand to hand, they promptly drew their swords.
Then truly there was great bloodshed; for the two armies were so close together that shield struck against shield, and they directed their sword-points at each other's faces. Not the weak, not the cowardly, might then give way; foot to foot they fought together like single champions, standing in the same spot until they could make room for themselves by victory. Therefore they moved ahead only when they had struck down a foeman. But in their fatigue a fresh adversary engaged them, and the wounded could not, as they are wont to do at other times, leave the line of battle, since the enemy were pressing on in front and their own men pushed them back from behind."
- Quintus Curtius Rufus, Historiae Alexandri Magni, 1st Century
"Their company rallied on a little mountain, but Sir William, the valiant, very boldly and bravely charged among the enemy like a man devoid of sense and discretion, on horseback, lance couched. Striking a Spaniard upon his flower-emblazoned shield, he made him feel through the heart his sharp blade of steel. Down to the ground he hurled him in the sight of all the people. Like a man full of great hardihood he rushed upon them, with drawn sword, and the Castilians by their might followed him on all sides, and threw spears and darts at him. They slew his horse under him, but Sir William Felton defended himself stoutly on foot, like a lion-hearted man; albeit his defence availed him little, for he was slain. God have mercy on him."
- Chandos le héraut, "Life of the Black Prince", 1386
"The men of Flanders, who were extremely eager to fight, were indignant, because they were not attacked by knights, but first by sergeants. So they did not move from the place where they were standing, but waiting in that very place they received them fiercely, and they killed nearly all of their horses, and afflicted them with many wounds. They lethally wounded only two. For these sergeants, from the valley of Soissons, were extremely worthy, and they fought just as well without horses as with horses. However, Gauthier de Ghistelles and Buridan (who, like a man of wonderful courage and almost fearless, was recalling to the memory of his knights their lady-loves, just as if he were involved in the games of young knights), after they had struck some of those sergeants to the ground, turned away from them and advanced onto the open battlefield, wishing to join in battle with the knights. And they encountered certain knights from the army of Champagne who were no less worthy than themselves. And so, with the lances of each side broken and swords unsheathed, they increased their blows. But with the arrival of Pierre de Remy and those who were in the same unit, Gauthier de Ghistelles and Buridan were captured by force."
- Guillelmi Britonis Armorici, Gesta Philipi Augusti, Early 14th Century
"And on they rode, I understand, till they saw the enemy right before them, advancing in great numbers: they’d broken into the town. They went to meet them, and as the two forces closed they sent their horses charging forward, and with shields braced and lances levelled they struck each other with their utmost might, piercing and shattering shields, smashing and splintering their lances and battering each other with the stumps. So loud was the clashing din of their blows that it would have drowned God’s thunder. You’d have heard the echoing clang and ring of helmets, battered down to the chainmail hoods. Gone were the boasts and claims made back indoors: rather more was called for now! And William the Marshal made a valiant show indeed: his lance broken, he drew his sword at once and plunged into the fray. No one seeing him would have thought him a novice in arms: he dealt and received so many blows before he was done – he’d no intention of leaving till he’d shown what he could do! Many found him a fearful foe as he cut through the press with awesome blows, so awesome indeed, and dealt with such force, that many gave way before him, terrified. They didn’t fancy what he was dishing out! But unappealing though they found it, he carried on with gusto, giving them more than they’d bargained for! And the fact is, sirs, the prowess of a single valiant knight can embolden a whole army, and inspired by his example they fought so bravely that they were worth twice their number. They drove the enemy through the gate by main force, back the way they’d come, over the outer bridge and on to the road. They’d enhanced their honour greatly."
- Anonymous, Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, ~1225
"It was a mighty mêlée and combat, and the count of Perche fought splendidly indeed and began to inflict real damage on our men – though he wasn’t to last long. Then the Marshal saw his men forcing the French back in no uncertain manner, driving them down the hill, so he reached out and seized the count of Perche’s bridle – rightly so, the count being the most eminent of the French. But the count had already taken a mortal wound from a sword, thrust in a fearful lunge through his visor by Sir Reginald Croc; and now, as he saw our forces driving his men back, he let go of his reins and gripped his sword in both hands; then William the Marshal dealt him three successive blows upon the helm, so strong and fierce that they left clear marks upon it, whereupon the count collapsed and went tumbling from his horse."
- Idem, Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, ~1225
"I and my knights agreed that we would attack some Turks who were loading up their baggage to the left of their camp, and we charged upon them. Whilst we were hunting them through the camp, I saw a Saracen who was getting on his horse, while one of his knights held the bridle for him. Just as he had got his two hands on the saddle to mount, I drove at him with my spear below the armpits, and flung him dead. His knight seeing this, left his lord and the horse, and, as I passed on, he pinned me down with his spear between the shoulder−blades, and stretched me along my horse's neck, and held me so tightly pressed down that I could not draw the sword round my waist; so I had to draw the sword that was hung to my horse, and when he saw that I had got my sword out, he drew back his spear, and left me.
When I and my knights had got through the Saracens' camp, we found some six thousand Turks, (at a guess) who had abandoned their quarters and drawn off into the fields. When they saw us, they came charging down on us, and slew Lord Hugh of Trichatel, Lord of Conflans, who carried his banner with me.
I and my knights clapped spurs to the rescue of Lord Ralph of Wanon, who was with me, whom they had pulled to earth; and whilst I was on my way back, the Turks pinned me down with their spears. My horse, feeling the weight, fell on his knees, and I passed on between his ears, and picked myself up with my shield round my neck and my sword in my hand. Lord Erard of Syverey, God rest his soul! who was of my company, came up to me, and said, that we had best draw off to a ruined house, and wait there until the King should come. And as we were going along on foot and horseback, a great horde of Turks broke upon us, and bore me down, and passed over me, and snatched my shield from my neck; and when they were gone by, Lord Erard of Syverey came back to me, and led me along, till we reached the walls of the ruined house; and there Lord Hugh of Scots rejoined us, with Lord Frederick of Loupey, and Lord Reynold of Menoncourt.
[...]
As I stood there on foot among my knights, all wounded as you have heard, the King came up with his whole battalion, with a great noise and din of trumpets and kettledrums, and halted on a raised path. Never did I see him so finely accoutred, for he towered head and shoulders above his followers, with a gilded helmet on his head, and a German sword in his hand. He came to a halt in this place; and those champion knights of his battalion, whose names I told you, hurled themselves among the Turks, together with several brave knights of the King's battalion. And I would have you know, that it was a very fine feat of arms; for there was no shooting with bows or cross−bows, but the striking on both sides was all with clubs and swords, the Turks and our men being all mixed up together."
- Jean de Joinville, Livre des Saintes Paroles et des bons Faiz de Nostre Saint Roy Looÿs, 1309
"The Lord of Ashur called a knight, named Lord John the Tall, and bade him go and fetch in the common people who had gone outside the town, lest they should run into danger. Whilst he was bringing them back, a Saracen began to shout to him in Arabic, that he would tilt with him if he liked; and he answered that he would do so willingly. Now, whilst Lord John was on his way to the Saracen to tilt with him, he cast his eyes to the left, and saw a group of Turks, about eight of them together, who had stood still to watch the tilting match. He abandoned his match with the Saracen, and rode up to the group of Turks who were standing quite quietly watching, ran one of them through the body with his lance, and flung him dead. When the others saw this, they set upon him, as he was retreating towards our men, and one struck him a great blow on his iron cap with a club and, as he passed on, Lord John gave him a sword−cut across the turban in which his head was wrapped, and sent the turban flying. (At that time they used to wear their turbans when they went to fight, because they will stop a heavy sword−cut.) One of the other Turks spurred up to him, and tried to catch him with his spear between the shoulders; but my Lord John saw it coming and swerved aside; and as the Saracen passed on, my Lord John gave him a back−handed cut with his sword across the arm, and sent his spear flying. And so he came back, and brought back the people on foot; and these three fine strokes he made in the sight of the Lord of Ashur and the rich men in Acre, and in the sight of all the women who had come on to the walls to see the Saracens."
- Idem, Livre des Saintes Paroles et des bons Faiz de Nostre Saint Roy Looÿs, 1309
"Four distinguished Arab chiefs, followed by a host of their people, took part in this campaign. They were brothers, sons of the mighty and distinguished Arab satrap Morel. These troops kept making persistent and very spirited attacks upon the flanks of our army. Yet our soldiers under the commands given them did not dare to break out of line against them. For if, contrary to the discipline of war, they should break the ranks, they would be exposed to a harsh sentence as deserters from their places. In the retinue of that Turk who was with us, however, there was a certain knight who could not endure this situation and longed to relieve us of the annoyance. Regardless of the rules imposed and reckless of his life, he spurred his horse forward with great courage. He threw the spear which he was carrying against one of the four brothers, then ran him through with his sword in the midst of his ranks, and hurled the lifeless body to the ground. Then he returned without injury to our lines."
- Willelmus Tyrensis, Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum, 1184
"When the emperor noticed that many of his men were afraid on account of the unusually large number of the enemy, he summoned the courage of a valiant prince, and with his hands raised to heaven in the sight of all he gave thanks to the Lord that the inevitable necessity of the battle was now upon them, which the enemies’ flight had deferred until now. At this speech, a mighty enthusiasm struck everyone, who, seeing the emperor's most joyful face, received encouragement, the young from an old man, the strong from the frail, [and] all from the one. Which God is as great as our God? That entire multitude, so certain of winning that it clasped chains rather than swords, succumbed in an instant, and at once the city itself was taken captive and the enemy outside was thrown down. There was carnage on both sides, slaughter everywhere, mounds of the fallen all round. [The Turks’] density prevented flight, and their great number, on which they prided themselves, harmed [them].
Now the business was close: the fighting was hand-to-hand, bows were broken, arrows did not fly out, [and] there was barely room for swords. In this way the throng disturbed everything, and what the enemy had intended to the ruin of our men resulted in their glory. The fleeting battle, which till then had been hemmed in by brambles and the jaws of cliffs, was now joined in a much freer space. The Christians satisfied their anger, which had burned so many times in vain. The Turks experienced unwillingly what those whom they provoked from afar could do at close quarters."
- Anonymous, Continuatio hystorie tractate de gestis uirorum illustrium, ~1200
"They were no sooner passed than the English and Gascons marched out of it, after them, with their lances in their rests, shouting their war-cry. The French turned about, wondering who they could be but they soon found they were their enemies. They immediately halted, and drew themselves up in battle array, and, with couched spears, prepared to meet the English and Gascons, who soon joined them. At this first onset many were unhorsed on each side, for both parties were well mounted. After this tilting-bout, they drew their swords, and attacking each other more closely, many hard blows were given, and many gallant deeds performed. This attack lasted a considerable time, and the ground was so well disputed, that it was difficult to say which of the two would be conqueror. The captal de Buch shone particularly, and did with his hand many deeds worthy so good a knight. In the end, however, the English and Gascons fought so valiantly, that the field remained to them: they were more than half as many again as the French."
- Jean Froissart, Chroniques, Late 14th Century
"When sir Beaumont thus heard himself called upon, he turned his horse about, lowered his lance, and made straight for sir Guy. These two knights met each other with such force, that their lances were shivered on their shields; but they were so firm in their seats that neither was unhorsed, as they passed each other. On their return, they drew their swords; and, at the same time, both their companies began to fight so furiously, that in the course of the rencounter many were unhorsed on each side."
- Idem, Chroniques, Late 14th Century
"They then armed themselves, mounted their horses, and drew up in the best array they were able. When they had advanced into the plain, they had not long to wait before they saw the French, marching in a large body, and in handsome order. No sooner was each party assured that those whom they saw were enemies, who seemed mutually eager for the contest, than sticking spurs into their horses, and with spears in their rests, they charged each other, shouting their different war-cries. I must say, that in this first conflict, many a gallant tilt was performed, and many a knight and squire were unhorsed and driven to the ground. In such deadly warfare, there is no accident but what may happen. Heliot de Calais, a most able squire and good man at arms, was knocked off his horse, by a violent stroke on the throat-piece with a spear, whose broad point was as sharp and as fine as a razor. This iron cut through the throat-piece, as well as all the veins: the stroke beat him to the ground, when he shortly after died: the more the pity. By this accident did he end his days. Among the French, there was a knight from Berry or Limousin, named sir William de Lignac, an excellent man at arms, who this day performed many gallant deeds.
The combat was sharp, and long continued on each side, close to the village of Yurac: when their lances failed, they drew their swords, and the attack was more vigorously renewed. Many feats of prowess were performed, many captures made, and many rescued. Of the English slain on the spot, was a Gascon knight, called the lord de Gernos and de Calais of the French, Thibaut du Pont. This battle was well and long fought many handsome deeds were done, for they were all men of valour: but in the end the English could not gain the field: they were fairly conquered by the French. Sir William de Lignac captured with his own hand sir Thomas Felton, séneschal of Bordeaux: nearly at the same time, the lords de Mucident, de Duras, de Rosem, de Langurant, were also made prisoners. Few of the English or Gascons but were made prisoners or slain."
- Idem, Chroniques, Late 14th Century
"The Franks, however, desiring to avenge count Herluin and to uphold themselves in arms, rise up, unshaken, against their foe. Now that the battle has been violently initiated through the [Normans'] deceit, the Franks, their spears and lances broken by the fighting, would at first valiantly struggle against drawn swords. Yet, at length, surrounded by the copiously flowing and destructive company of the men of Coutances and Bayeux, and also of the pagans, they would be slaughtered, torn to pieces, as sacrificial animals are by wolves. Thus, accosted in battle by a deadly shock, twice nine most noble counts from king Louis' side fall prey to death, perishing as Mars vents his rage, nor would there be any hope either of life or flight for those left behind. But king Louis, perceiving himself to be foresaken by the protection of the Franks and knowing the risk of battle, to avoid having to fight, would seek refuge in flight."
- Dudone Sancti Quintini, De moribus et actis primorum Normanniae ducum, 1015
"Indeed in the first combat encounter they would do battle with mutilated spears and lances. But in the second with glittering swords. For at that time a hardy band of Normans, approaching as a battle-line of glittering swords, their brazen shields joined and strapped together, has attacked those of the Franks who are armed and opposing them and, mangling and overthrowing and smashing right and left the cuneos of their enemies, has cut through the thick host of opponents, riding over the corpses of the slain. And in that very spot the tide of battle is turned against the cuneos of the remaining enemy."
- Idem, De moribus et actis primorum Normanniae ducum, 1015
"The trumpets blared, the horns resounded, a great cry from each side was heard; shield was thrust back by shield, boss was repelled by boss; once lances had been shattered, swords themselves were being notched and scarred. The ranks of the Danes and Flemish came up into hand-to-hand battle, overtook the French and began to drive them back. They were unable to withstand the rush of so many nations, but, staggering, began instead to contemplate retreat. So great was the [size] and noise of the cloud of missiles that the air itself seemed to grow dark."
- Anonymous, Chronica de gestis consulum Andegavorum, Early 12th Century
"And on the side of the Vandals, either wing was held by the chiliarchs, and each one led the division under him, while in the centre was Tzazon, the brother of Gelimer, and behind him were arrayed the Moors. But Gelimer himself was going about everywhere exhorting them and urging them on to daring. And the command had been previously given to all the Vandals to use neither spear nor any other weapon in this engagement except their swords.
After a considerable time had passed and no one began the battle, John chose out a few of those under him by the advice of Belisarius and crossing the river made an attack on the centre, where Tzazon crowded them back and gave chase. And the Romans in flight came into their own camp, while the Vandals in pursuit came as far as the stream, but did not cross it. And once more John, leading out more of the guardsmen of Belisarius, made a dash against the forces of Tzazon, and again being repulsed from there, withdrew to the Roman camp. And a third time with almost all the guards and spearmen of Belisarius he took the general's standard and made his attack with much shouting and a great noise. But since the barbarians manfully withstood them and used only their swords, the battle became fierce, and many of the noblest of the Vandals fell, and among them Tzazon himself, the brother of Gelimer. Then at last the whole Roman army was set in motion, and crossing the river they advanced upon the enemy, and the rout, beginning at the centre, became complete; for each of the Roman divisions turned to flight those before them with no trouble. And the Massagetae, seeing this, according to their agreement among themselves joined the Roman army in making the pursuit, but this pursuit was not continued for a great distance. For the Vandals entered their own camp quickly and remained quiet, while the Romans, thinking that they would not be able to fight it out with them inside the stockade, stripped such of the corpses as had gold upon them and retired to their own camp. And there perished in this battle, of the Romans less than fifty, but of the Vandals about eight hundred."
- Procopius, Ὑπὲρ τῶν Πολέμων Λόγοι, "History of the Wars", ~550
"Dionysios moved forward like an immovable wall, stretching forth his lance against both Kontostephanos and the troops surrounding him. When the Romans met his attack, both sides fought for a while with lances, jostling one another; once the lances were shattered. and the battlefield became fenced in by the piling up of pikes, they unsheathed their long swords and fell upon one another, flailing away. When their blades were blunted by the troops' armor made all of bronze and iron, the Hungarians were at a loss, for they had not expected the Romans to withstand their onset. The Romans, taking hold of their iron maces (it was their custom to carry this weapon into battle), smote the Hungarians, and the blow against head and face was fatal. Reeling back, many fell off their saddles; others bled to death from the wounds. When this unbroken formation scattered in disorder, there was no Roman who did not strike and lay low a Hungarian, or who did not strip the fallen, or who did not put on the enemy's panoply, or who did not mount the horse whose rider he had slain."
- Niketas Choniates, "Annals", Early 13th Century
Thank you to the person who reminded me of this account!
This event occurred during the reign of Manuel Komnenos. The "superiority" of the mace here is likely a post facto reasoning, in my opinion. A literal analysis of this battle is strange as well; they both use lances, and then they both use swords, and then the Romans use their maces. If it was smarter to use the mace, since both sides were armored, then why didn't the Byzantines do so at the beginning? This is not to say I exactly doubt the efficacy of the mace here (and I especially do not doubt that the mace was used in this encounter by the Greeks); mace blows (with the aid of a horse) very commonly could kill with blows to even helmeted heads (which swords could not, unless they struck an unarmed part, barring freak accidents). However, I find it likely, due to the other accounts of battles shown above, that the details had become corrupted, especially as this follows the common Greek topos of the "stupid barbarian" breaking or bending his sword and then becoming useless as a fighter. Trusting Andrew of Hungary's reasoning for the defeat of the Germans at Benevento (1266), the Germans were stupid for using long swords, maces, and axes instead of the shorter, acute swords that the French used to stab them. While the use of maces may have given them an edge over the Hungarians in this battle, just as the thrusting swords of the French may have given them an edge over the Germans at Benevento, I do not think it can necessarily be applied to warfare in a more general sense. Otherwise we meet the obvious contradiction, and then we must ask ourselves: why did those warriors even bother with those certain weapons?
Either way, it matters not. Lances were used, and then broken, and then both swords and maces were used.
Likewise, we have an earlier written account of the battle (possibly eyewitness) that simply says so:
"For their [the Hungarians'] custom is always that the picked men among them fill the foremost regiment; long since aware of this, the emperor directed Andronicus that his array should be in reverse. So when they came near one another, Andronicus ordered the leading regiments to shoot arrows at the Hungarians. When they saw them [the Hungarians] charging at them, they were to flee, not straight toward the Romans’ army, but rather to the sides, so that as they divided on either hand, the Hungarians would be left in the empty space in the midst of the battle array. But at their assault, the others [the Roman van] turned their backs and fled at full speed until they reached the Sava. Finally two of the Romans’ regiments on the left, which Kogh Vasil and Tatikios commanded, held out, but the rest were swept aside. Demetrius Branas, who was left with eighty men when his followers were scattered, engaged the enemy, and fell there, struggling valiantly, after he had been struck a deadly wound on the face; after he had been made captive, he was carried off to the Hungarians’ camp. His brother George, however, alarmed at their superiority of number, lacked courage for the conflict.
The left-hand wing of the Romans thus turned to flight, but the right-hand one attacked the Hungarians’ left and clearly drove them back. When Dionysius observed this, he was minded to attack those about the general Andronicus. Many of his followers, however, commenced to be afraid, wherefore they reined in their cavalry. Noticing this, Dionysius reproached their cowardice, but yet begged them to remain there, lest they make their fear evident to the Romans. Comprehending what was happening, Andronicus Lampardas feared lest the multitude with Dionysius, when he went elsewhere, would then fall upon Andronicus the general; he decided that he had to engage Dionysius first. As they clashed with each other, a din arose, and a clatter occurred everywhere as spears were broken against shields and fell to the ground. Although those arrayed under the other Branas, George, came to aid them, the Romans were exhausted.
When the general Andronicus observed this, lest, after those with Lampardas were seriously defeated, the whole conflict should devolve on him, he burst forth upon the foe and made a mighty onset, so that at the first encounter eighty of the Romans fell, but many more of the barbarians. By their valor, however, the Romans, who sustained the struggle with unutterable might, finally drove them back. Such a slaughter of barbarians occurred there that the plains were almost covered with carcasses. For when their spears were broken and their swords shattered, they smote the wretches’ heads with maces."
- Joannes Kinnamos, "Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus", ~1180
The account of this battle is more descriptive in the tactics applied, and a little more logical. It is possible the author was a military man as well.
"Nor was the emperor himself entirely out of danger. For reckoning that if he opposed the seven who still surrounded John, it would be possible for others numbering upwards of three hundred to attack on both sides, he decided that he had to engage the main body first. When they gave way, it was likely that those surrounding John would also withdraw. Spurring his horse he rushed into their midst. Intending to strike one of them with his spear, however, he missed him. For as the barbarian twisted his hips, the spear passed vainly by his side. Then he engaged him hand-to-hand.
Observing this, Bakchinos himself and his followers left John there and assailed the emperor at a run. The event was laden with horror. The emperor, however, let go his lance and drew the sword with which he was equipped; continually striking and being struck, he turned about among them, until when the rest were scattered, the result of the whole battle devolved on himself and Bakchinos, who excelled in bravery and possessed an immense frame. After a long engagement, Bakchinos struck, bringing down his sword on the emperor’s jaw, yet was unable to cut the screen [of maille] which hung from the helmet over the eyes. The blow, however, had enough force that the rings placed next to the flesh were deeply impressed on it. The emperor, having deprived the barbarian of a hand with his sword, hastily turned him over to his cousin [John Kantakouzenos], while he himself was impatient to attack the foe again; but both Johns and the barbarian Bakchinos labored to withhold him from the assault. For already the latter, reduced to obedience, pretended friendship. Displaying the hair of his head, he thereby signaled [his surrender] to the mob which was coming to meet him. In this struggle Kantakouzenos was deprived of two fingers of one hand."
- Idem, "Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus", ~1180
"Against the King of France and the Frenchmen came up the body of the Costentinese; each party closing with the other, and clashing with levelled lances. When the lances broke and failed, then they assailed each other with swords."
- Wace, Roman de Rou, ~1160
"And now might be heard the loud clang and cry of battle, and the clashing of lances. The English stood firm in their barricades, and shivered the lances, beating them into pieces with their gisarmes and clubs. The Normans drew their swords and hewed down the barricades, and the English in great trouble fell back upon their standard, where were collected the maimed and wounded.
[...]
Robert Fitz Erneis fixed his lance, took his shield, and galloping towards the standard with his keen-edged sword, struck an Englishman who was in front, killed him, and then drawing back his sword, attacked many others, and pushed straight for the standard, trying to beat it down; but the English surrounded it, and killed him with their bills. He was found on the spot, when they afterwards sought for him, dead, and lying at the standard's foot."
- Idem, Roman de Rou, ~1160
"Then Count William divided his forces into three corps of horsemen, taking over the first line which, under his command, was to make the first attack. On the other side, Count Thierry similarly drew up his lines; in one of these he and Gervaise, the castellan, were leaders, in the other Count Frederick. With lances drawn back, they advanced little by little on both sides, making their way by lance and sword, and great numbers fell. Both the counts were fighting as if they offered themselves to death, rushing into the midst of hostile arms; they had decided beforehand to die in battle rather than be expelled from the countship.
Now in the first attack Daniel, commander of Count Thierry's knights, was trying to force his way into Count William's lines; and there Count Frederick was unhorsed and opposite him Richard of Woumen was taken prisoner in this first contact of the lines; the number of those joined in conflict was infinite! Finally they resorted to swords. But when part of Count William's forces and that formation in which he himself was fighting, began to give way, he turned in flight, and Daniel pursued him with his men. While they were struggling on both sides, some fleeing, some pursuing, the second part of the detachment of Count William which was hiding in ambush, rushed out in the face of Daniel and his men. And because they were stimulated by fresh energy and common purpose, and had been instructed in how to fight, they did not hesitate a moment, but intercepted the pursuers with their lances and swords. Then Count William, rallying quickly from flight, turned back with his forces; he urged them on, bold in spirit and strong in body, to attack the enemy furiously and disperse them in one onslaught. When Count Thierry's men saw the imminent perils of battle they cast aside their arms and fled without protection in all directions, so that only ten knights remained with their count. Then at last Count William and his men, throwing off their cuirasses and thus riding more easily, secured the fruits of their victory; they killed some of the enemy and captured others."
- Galbertus notarius Brugensis, De multro, traditione et occisione gloriosi Karoli comitis Flandriarum, 1128
"Because during the attack of the armies, breaking spears and armor hitting against each other produced such a great clatter and bang, and the clang of swords resounded so loudly, as if some huge rock had collapsed, that even those who were several miles away could hear it. Then knight attacked knight, armor crushed under the pressure of armor, and swords hit faces. And when the ranks closed, it was impossible to tell the coward from the brave, the bold from the slow, because all of them were pressed together, as if in some tangle. They changed places or advanced only when the victor took the place of the defeated by throwing down or killing the enemy. When at last they broke the spears, all the units and armor clung together so tightly that, pushed by the horses and crowded, they fought only with swords and axes slightly, extended on their handles, and they made a noise in that fighting that only the blows of hammers can raise in a forge. And among the knights fighting hand to hand only with swords, one could observe examples of great courage."
- Johannes Longinus, Annales seu cronici incliti regni Poloniae, 1480
"There the Poles find them and attack. Knowing how few they are, the Poles cleverly attack in a series of waves, each withdrawing when exhausted and being replaced by the next wave. When day returns after a night of fighting and the Turks see how small a force has inflicted all this damage on them, they are ashamed. They then split their force, one part attacking the Poles from in front, the other from the rear. The Turks' captives are grouped in several places under guard, so as to prevent them going to help the Poles, or the Poles from recapturing them. Fighting starts up again. This time the Poles, having broken their spears, use sword and arrows."
- Idem, Annales seu cronici incliti regni Poloniae, 1480
"Meanwhile the Czechs, now feeling almost certain of victory, were racing ahead of each other, no longer in rank and units as before, imagining that now that the Poles had retreated into the forest they could not be called back to fight, and dispersed, out of their ranks, and cowering, they could be caught like hares. But Bolesław the warrior, seeing the enemy close by, cried out, My young men, let us be the ones to strike first, and us the ones to finish. So saying, immediately with his hunting spear he struck the first man in the enemy line to the ground from his horse, while at the same time as he did so, his cup-bearer Dzierżek served a fatal drink to another. Then indeed the Polish youth fell upon them in earnest, clashing first with lances, then when these gave out drawing swords. Shields shielded few of the Czechs who approached, their armor was more weight then help, their helmets gave their heads distinction but no safety. Iron on iron is sharpened here, the daring warrior is recognized here; brave men by brave are vanquished here. Bodies lie in heaps, faces and chests are pouring sweat, streams run with blood, the young Poles cry, This is how men’s courage is proven, by thus winning fame and not stealthily snatching plunder and running for the woods in the way of greedy wolves. Those Czechs and Germans in their gleaming armor who were the first in line were the first to fall, encumbered rather than helped by the weight."
- Anonymous, Cronice et gesta ducum sive principum Polonorum, ~1115
"When the Tatars came in their usual manner to the city of Pest, he took his weapons and mounted his horse to meet them. When they were about to clash, they turned their back and went off, as was their wont. But the duke spurred on his compliant horse, caught up with one of them and hit him with his lance so that, even though the lance broke, he fell to the ground. When another, their knes, that is leader, came to the aid of the fallen men, the duke speedily grabbed the sword that hung on his saddle in a warlike way and with one blow cut off his arm. Toppling at once out of the saddle, the man gave up his soul. Since the rest took flight, they captured the fallen man, bound him and took him back to the army, together with the horses. The Hungarians used the occasion to unanimously disparage the king and praise the duke."
- Master Roger, Epistola in miserabile carmen super destructione regni Hungarie, 1244
"There many powerful lance thrusts were delivered, as a result of which many were wounded on both sides, and some of them even overthrown. Abandoning the lances, they laid their hands on their axes and swords, and a great melee ensued. There you could see the visors of some of the men's bascinets flying off, and vambraces and musequines [voiders] getting ripped off; and others lost their grip on their swords and axes, and grappled with their arms and daggers."
- Gutierre Díaz de Gámez, El Victorial, ~1450
"And let him know, who would know, that between Pero Niño and the Christians who were of his following there were more than a hundred Moors; and he went forward striking and killing, and as the place was strait, not a blow was lost. When he had broken his lance against them he drew his sword, and struck so many and such signal blows that it was all one whether those whom they reached were armed or not, for none of them used lance again.
Thus did he go as far as the bridge which is near to the city; then there came out a knight armed and on foot, who most boldly came up to him near enough to lay hands on his horse's reins. Pero Niño struck him such a blow on the top of the head, that he split his headpiece over his skull, and the Moor fell to the ground dead, but with the blow Pero Niño nearly lost his sword. In this hour he had to pass through perils and labours so great that no other knight in the world has ever had to face more in the same length of time; for the Moors had seized him by the legs, striving to drag him from his horse, and tore off the sheath of his sword and his dagger, but with the help of God he freed himself from them all in fine fashion; and whoever looked closely might see those who were above the gate leave the walls and fly towards the castle. Thus cutting his way, Pero Niño felt his horse weaken beneath him; and he looked and saw that it had lost much blood and could no longer bear him, and that his spurs availed him little. Then he turned the head of his horse, that had reached the end of its forces, towards his own men, and continued to strike and cut a way out of the midst of the Moors who were laying hands upon him. The horse came of a good stock; although strength failed it by reason of the great blows and wounds that it had received, its courage did not fail, and it got its master out of this pass. Before the horse fell, a page brought up another to Pero Niño, and a moment later the brave horse rolled dead to the ground, its entrails coming out of its belly.
Pero Niño set himself afresh to fight the Moors, and soon his second horse was covered with so many wounds that only with great difficulty could he get back to his men. The rider had been spared no more than the horse; only the blows fell upon good armour, though not so good but that it was broken and bent in many places. His sword was like a saw, toothed in great notches, the hilt twisted by dint of striking mighty blows, and all dyed in blood. Later Pero Niño sent this sword by a page to France, with other presents to my Lady of Serifontaine."
- Idem, El Victorial, ~1450
"At the same time that this squadron charged us the Count di Cajazzo attacked our van; but they came not so close, for when they should have couched their lances their hearts failed, and they fell into disorder; and the Swiss took fifteen or twenty of them in a company, and put them to the sword: the rest fled, and were but indifferently pursued; for the Marshal de Gié with much ado kept his forces together, for he perceived another great body of them not very far off. However, some followed the chase, and the enemy fled over the ground where we had charged along the highway, with their swords only in their hands; for they had thrown away their lances.
[...]
It is strange that so many should have been killed with the sword, for our artillery killed not ten in both armies, and the battle lasted not a quarter of an hour; for as soon as the enemy had broken their lances they fled, and the chase lasted about three-quarters of an hour. Their battles in Italy used not to be managed at this rapid rate; their custom was to fight squadron after squadron, and the fight lasted sometimes a whole day together, without either side winning the victory."
- Philippe de Commynes, Chronique et hystoire, 1498
"Item. You shall order hundred horsemen in the following way: 20 horsemen in an outrider detachment [honce], 30 horsemen in a support detachment [v posilcich] and a 50 in a squadron following them. Each squadron [huf] has to have one commander to lead them; and in the squadron of 50 horsemen there should be two marksmen in [two] detachments [stracence] from both sides of the squadron, two lancers at the point [of the squadron], three after them and then four should follow them.
Item. 200 horsemen you should order the following way; in support of the first squadron should be hundred horsemen, two detachments, in one 25 horses, in the other 35 and in the main squadron 140. In the first detachment there should be two horsemen at the point, three following them and finally the rest in a body of four people wide; in the other detachment three at the point, four behind them and finally five abreast riding in order.
[...]
In the major division, in which your Highness will be, place one rank of naked swords and maces before the rank with the banners and one rank [of sword and macemen] behind it. If you wish you can also have your own squadron, 50 horses or 100, which would guard the major division. And also the other two squadrons which are ahead of the king's squadron should be composed of two ranks of naked swords and maces near the banner. The footsoldiers should cover the flanks as already mentioned. The marksmen which are ahead of the pages [of the lancers], right before the clash, should be in detachments at both sides of the point [špic, the wedge point of a squadron] and they should shoot at the enemy, before the squadron enters into the fray and especially into their horses, so that when they hurt their horses, they will destroy their order; and these marksmen should be near the point. This should be ordered to every squadron. In case our squadrons in the van should be pressed or disordered, which God forbid, they should be instructed, not to flee farther than to the major division. There, next to the major division, the fugitives should make a stand as expected from proper folk. This should be ordered to every squadron.
Furthermore, behind every major division there should be a detachment. Each should be composed of two ranks of fine lancers and three ranks of fine marksmen. Arranged in this way, God willing, the squadrons will be well off."
- Václav Vlček, Naučení o šikování jízdních, pěších i vozů, ~1490
This is a Bohemian treatise. The author wants there to be 18 separate squadrons ("divisions" in the translation). Seemingly, the smaller squadrons consisted of men at arms (with lances) and mounted crossbowmen, but he wants the main battle (the "major division") to consist of men carrying swords and maces instead (at least the front).
The masses of squadrons was very much normal for the region; Philipp von Seldeneck recommends this when two large armies face one another, and he says to have many haufen (squadrons) to destroy the order of the enemy in many skirmishes before the main fight (such a fight presumably being done with a large wedge too, a formation which he prescribes).
The Italians likewise liked to use many squadrons and large reserves, according to Philippe de Commynes and Jean de Bueil. Perhaps that may have been derived from the Byzantines in Italy, the tactics of whom William of Apulia describes in the 11th century: "... it is not their custom to engage all their forces at the first shock, they rather send another troop after the first, so that while the enemy weakens their own strength increases and their troops are emboldened.", although there is a good chance that it was simply invented independently, but I digress.
It also seems that many of the Near Eastern cataphracts had started to charge solely with swords, maces, or axes (ie, sidearms) around 10th century (prior, they seemed to have mostly charged with lances; I also suspect that cataphracts charging with lances had continued to be done; how common one or the other was when compared to one another, I cannot say):
"The kataphraktoi should have the following weapons: iron maces with all-iron heads-the heads must have sharp corners and be three-cornered, four-cornered, or six-cornered-or else other iron maces or sabers. All of them must have swords. They should hold their iron maces and sabers in their hands and have other iron maces either on their belts or saddles. The first line, that is, the front of the formation, the second, third, and fourth lines must have the same complement, but from the fifth line on back the kataphraktoi on the flanks should set up like this one man armed with a lance and one armed with a mace or else one of the men carrying a saber, and so they should be all the way to the back lines."
- Nikephoros II Phokas, Στρατηγικὴ Ἔκθεσις Καὶ Σύνταξις Νικηφόρου Δεσπότου, Strategikè Ékthesis Kaì Syntaxis Nikephórou Despótou, "Praecepta Militaria", ~965
Personally, due to the wording, I find it likely that the "mace" was seen as the norm, but not to such a point as for no one to wield a sword in hand instead. Although, in truth, it matters little.
Nikephoros Ouranos repeats Phokas:
"The weapons of the kataphraktoi should be the following: maces, made completely of iron, with sharp corners on the heads so that they are three-, four-, or six- cornered, or other iron maces, or sabers. Everyone must have swords and all must have iron maces either on their belts or their saddles. The first line, that is, the face of the formation, the second, third, and fourth, must have the same complement, but the kataphraktoi on the flanks should line up as follows from the fifth line on back, one a lancer and the other armed with a mace or one of the men carrying sabers. The men in the back should also line up in this way, that is to say, the very last row and the one in front of it."
- Nikephoros Ouranos, "Taktika", Early 11th Century
Likewise, Saracen cataphracts (of uncertain nationality; although I am partial to the idea that they were likely Turkic in origin) were noted by the Franks using only swords during the First Crusade (1096–1099).
"The amir of Jerusalem came to his help with an army, and the king of Damascus brought a great number of men. So Karbuqa collected an immense force of pagans — Turks, Arabs, Saracens, Paulicians, Azymites, Kurds, Persians, Agulani and many other people who could not be counted. The Agulani numbered three thousand; they fear neither spears nor arrows nor any other weapon, for they and their horses are covered all over with plates of iron. They will not use any weapons except swords when they are fighting."
- Fulcherus Carnotensis, Gesta Francorum Iherusalem peregrinantium, 1127
The author was an eyewitness.
Now why swords and not lances? The Greek cataphracts/kataphraktoi seemed to have started to charge at the trot by the 10th century. Rather than the force of the lance (which, for the most part, really does require a gallop to be powerful) or the impetus of the horse, perhaps they wished for the closeness of the corps would instead be how their charge would break their enemies. They would not need to drop their lances, but also, with such good order, where they would often be inferior at the shock, they might be superior in the melee, and they would not tire their horses out at the initial clash. Do note that the cataphracts were not inherently meant to fight infantry, as some have thought.
For how mounted swordsmen can beat lancers, even those who did not break their spears at the first encounter, continue reading to the end.
The Sword Amongst the Foot
But although the horseman especially needs a sidearm, the footman as well entirely needs it, as discussed in the beginning. Closing the opponent is important for victory (since victory demands that one side must take it when a road to it appears) and although polearms do not break as often for the footmen than with the horsemen (since they do not have the speed of the horse to aid their strikes), we still read of them breaking. And likewise, they (and the horsemen, as seen above) will often throw their lances to make a path to charge (and then draw their sidearms). Likewise, swords were much more common amongst the commons than people think. While I won't go into too much detail (I have not saved a lot of the examples, so this is largely a "trust me bro"), the English 1242 Statute of Winchester, for example, required the second to last wealth range to own swords; the class under them were to bring sickles and "other lesser arms", and this group did not make up the soldiery. However, ordinances that do not mention swords does not necessarily prove the absence of the sword; in the same 1242 ordinance, none of the wealth classes are required to own spears; however, we can safely assume this is an assumption that they will have them (as spears were common), rather than proof that the mid-13th century English military was entirely made up of bowmen and swordsmen. Likewise, swords in the Late Medieval period and Early Modern period were extremely common, yet often they are omitted from the requirements. The frequency that the sword shows up in civilian life as well as accounts leads to the position that these are just omissions and they assume they have sidearms (in the same sense they assume they have clothes; the omission is not proof that soldiers did not wear clothes).
But not only was the sword important for the spearmen or halberdiers or whatnot, but likewise for the archers, for obvious reasons. Archers, crossbowmen, handgunners, and other shooters all frequently charged. The famous example of archers charging at Azincourt (1415) is more the rule than the exception (especially bows and crossbows, which have short effective ranges, especially when shooting heavy arrows). And even when the archers or crossbowmen have shield-bearers to protect them, the shooters will have to get involved in the fight eventually.
"The heavy infantry, who are drawn up in the front line, advance still closer to the enemy. If the men have darts or missile weapons, they throw them, resting their lances on the ground. If without such weapons, they advance more closely, then hurl their lances like javelins, take out their swords and fight, each man remaining in his proper position and not pursuing the enemy if they turn to retreat. The men to the rear keep their heads covered with their shields and with their lances support those in the front. Obviously, it is essential for the soldiers in the first line to keep themselves protected until they come to blows with the enemy. Otherwise, they might be hit by enemy arrows, especially if they do not have coats of mail or greaves."
- Maurice, Στρατηγικόν, Strategikon, ~600
Maurice must have considered the advantage from the onset of missiles to be greater than the advantage from reach in a hand-to-hand encounter. However, the author of the Speculum Regale (mid-13th century) explicitly discourages this practice (unless you have two spears), as the author considers that, when in array and on foot (and on the field), it is better to have one spear rather than two swords in such a scenario. Do not consider this as a contradiction against my thesis, as the use of the spear does not preclude the sword, and if the spear had no advantages, it would not have been used (as with the sword).*
"The infantry, as noted, is already covering the rear. In the event that neither the horsemen who first rode up ahead nor those in the second group are able to check an enemy countercharge and retreat through the rear of the line of infantry, then these flank guards come and station themselves abreast of the line of infantry, but not along the front to avoid disorder and confusion. Then the infantry comes out of the deep formation of the files it had gone into, and the force again fills the gaps in the line and stands to resist the enemy. If the enemy advances to within bowshot and attempts to charge and break up our phalanx, a very dangerous move for them, the infantry should close ranks in the regular way. The first, second, and third men in each file form a foulkon, interlocking their shields, fix their spears firmly in the ground, holding them inclined forward and straight outside their shields, so that anyone who dares come too close will quickly experience them. They also lean their shoulders and put their weight against the shields to resist any pressure from the enemy. The third man, who is standing nearly upright, and the fourth man hold their spears like javelins, so when the foe gets close they can use them either for thrusting or for throwing and then draw their swords."
- Idem, Στρατηγικόν, Strategikon, ~600
"And as they doo mistake the conuenient arming of horsemen and footmen, so they also mistake the weaponing of them: for whereas Swords of conuenient length, forme and substance, haue been in all ages esteemed by all warlike Nations, of al other sorts of weapons the last weapon of refuge both for horsemen, and footmen, by reason that when al their other weapons in fight haue failed them, either by breaking, losse, or otherwise, they then haue presentlie betaken themselues to their short arming Swords and Daggers, as to the last weapons, of great effect & execution for all Martiall actions: so our such men of warre (contrarie to the auncient order and vse Militarie) doo now a daies preferre and allowe that armed men Piquers, should rather weare Rapiers of a yard and a quarter long the blades, or more, than strong short arming Swords; little considering (or not vnderstanding) that a squadrō of armed men in the field being readie to encounter with another squadron, their Enemies, ought to streighten and close themselues by frunt and flanckes, and that after they haue giuen their first thrush with their Piques, and being come to ioyne with their enemies frunt to frunt, and face to face (and therefore the vse & execution of the piques of the formost rancks being past) they must presentlie betake themselues to the vse of their Swords and Daggers..."
- John Smythe, Certain discourses, 1590
"Last refuge" had a different connotation, as it is commented (eg., by John Cruso) for even the lancers, who break their lances at the onset, that their swords are their "last refuge"; notwithstanding the daggers they wear at their sides or the weapons slung at their saddle. And here, John Smythe makes note that he believes the use of the sword is more of a "when" and not "if". Whether or not he is correct is moot, as he is clearly not calling the sword a "weapon only to be used in emergencies or extremities".
"... in such sort as by the nearnes of the formost ranks of their enemies before them, they haue not spaceenough againe to thrust; nor that by the nearnes of their fellowes ranks next behind them, they haue any conuenient elbowe roome to pull backe their piques to giue a new thrust; by meanes whereof they haue vtterly loste the vse of their piques, they therfore must either presentlie let them fall to the ground as vnprofitable; or else may with both their hands dart, and throw them as farre forward into & amongst the ranks of their enemies as they can, to the intent by the length of them to trouble their ranks, and presently in the twinkling of an eie or instant, must draw their short arming swordes and daggers, and giue a blow and thrust (tearmed a halfe reuerse, & thrust) all at, and in one time at their faces: And therewithall must presentlie in an instant, with their daggers in their left hands, thrust at the bottome of their enemies bellies vnder the lammes of their Cuyrasses, or at any other disarmed parts..."
- Idem, Certen instructions, 1594
Smythe explicitly in the text finds the idea of fencing with pikes to be ridiculous, and his prescribed formation for the pikemen follows this; in short, they are very close together. This is not at all the only idea formed in the 16th century, and other experienced captains (and captains of infantry at that) wanted room for the pikemen to fence with (and so they would not immediately fall to pell mell).*
"Let him practise each sort of weapon, although he professe the Pike, Calliuer or Musket, and particularly the sword and target; the which in mine opinion is verie important to many effectes, where men ioyne close together: and moreouer they be very necessarie, to view, and reknowledge batteries, to begin assaults, to make an entrance, to giue a Camisada, & to many other purposes presented in wars."
- Robert Barret, The theorike and practike of moderne vvarres, 1598
"Now for the Pike, which the Spaniards do tearme Sen̄ora y Reyna de las armas, the Queene and mistresse of weapons. The souldier which carieth the same, is to bee well armed with a good corslet, furnished with his gorget, Morion, tasses, pouldrons, vambraces, and gauntlets also; to be armed as he ought to be; whatsoeuer opinion other men may hold to the contrary, supposing a bare payre of Cuyrasses onely sufficient: but I am of opinion, that the armed Picquier ought to bee armed in all points (as I haue said) for defence: and then to offend, to be weaponed with a good Pike of ground Ashe, of seuenteen or eighteen foote long at the least, well and strongly headed, with the cheekes three foote long, or there about: and for other weapon, to weare a good short sword and dagger: for the dagger is a weapon of great aduantage in Pell mell."
- Idem, The theorike and practike of moderne vvarres, 1598
Obviously, he is commending the dagger because he believes in battle, as you have read earlier, men come so close together that sometimes even swords can hardly be used well; viz., he wants his pikemen to wear daggers because he believes they are advantageous. Obviously, he still wants soldiers to carry swords; and, and if you will, if men can come so close as to use their daggers, then they might often come close yet far enough to use their swords (which you will soon see to be the case).
"The Pikes arm'd at the Points with Lozange heads, if the cheeks, or sides of the Pikes are not armed with thin Plates of Iron four Foot deep, are very apt to be broken off near the Heads, if the Push be vigorous, and the Resistance considerable: Nor is this all; for unless the Pikes be armed with those thin Iron Plates, they are easily cut off with sharp Swords, for the Pike, especially toward the end, is carried tapering, to poise it the better, and thereby renders it the more flippent for those who use it; so that the slenderer part of the Pike, if unarm'd, is the more liable to be cut off, it being there nearest the Enemy; whereas if the Pikes were armed with those thin Plates, and four Foot deep, no cutting Swords (which are alwayes of the shortest) could destroy the Pikes, since that part of the Staff of the Pike which is unarmed, would be out of the reach of the Horsemans sharp cutting Sword: I remember we once carried a Fort by storm, because the Enemies Pikes had not those Plates, whereby the Heads of them were cut off."
- Roger Boyle, A treatise of the art of war, 1677
"And at first striking mutually with their spears, and by the frequency of the blows, the majority shattered, [and] they fell to the struggle of the sword."
- Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica, ~35 B.C., Translation by Me
"Both men were fine to look upon with their magnificent physiques and their ardour for combat. Everyone looked forward, as it were, to a battle of gods. By his carriage and the brilliance of his arms, the Macedonian inspired terror as if he were Ares, while Dioxippus excelled in sheer strength and condition; still more because of his club he bore a certain resemblance to Heracles.
As they approached each other, the Macedonian flung his javelin from a proper distance, but the other inclined his body slightly and avoided its impact. Then the Macedonian poised his long lance and charged, but the Greek, when he came within reach, struck the spear with his club and shattered it. After these two defeats, Coragus was reduced to continuing the battle with his sword, but as he reached for it, the other leaped upon him and seized his swordhand with his left, while with his right hand the Greek upset the Macedonian's balance and made him lose his footing. As he fell to the earth, Dioxippus placed his foot upon his neck and, holding his club aloft, looked to the spectators."
- Idem, Bibliotheca historica, ~35 B.C.
Quintus Curtius Rufus gives a similar story of this event, but rather than Dioxippus shattering the sarissa of his opponent, he closed the distance rapidly after Coragus (called 'Corratas' in his version) threw his dart, compelling Coragus to let loose his pike and draw his sword.
"The whole affair being now a trial of strength between man and man at close quarters, as the combatants used their swords and not their spears, the superiority was at first on the side of the dexterity and daring of the mercenaries, which enabled them to wound a considerable number of the Romans."
- Polybius, Ἱστορίαι, Historíai, ~150 BC
The translation of this excerpt is controversial, as it assumes there was a corruption in the extant. The original text is strange, but it says they could use neither sword nor spear. If it was, in fact, not a corruption, all this shows is that men did come close together, and did not wholly rely on reach.*
"The Tribunes accordingly gave out the spears of the Triarii, who are the last of the three ranks, to the first ranks, or Hastati: and ordering the men to use their swords only, after their spears were done with, they charged the Celts full in front. When the Celts had rendered their swords useless by the first blows delivered on the spears, the Romans close with them, and rendered them quite helpless, by preventing them from raising their hands to strike with their swords, which is their peculiar and only stroke, because their blade has no point. The Romans, on the contrary, having excellent points to their swords, used them not to cut but to thrust: and by thus repeatedly hitting the breasts and faces of the enemy, they eventually killed the greater number of them."
- Idem, Ἱστορίαι, Historíai, ~150 BC
It was with swords that the finishing blow was made.*
"As long as the action was confined to the discharge of missiles it was equally contested on both sides, but now the Roman right where the panic and flight began was with difficulty holding its ground; the left, on the other hand, was pressing back the barbarians in front, and the cohorts in the rear were creating a panic amongst them. When they [the Celtiberians] had discharged their soliferreis and phalaricisque they drew their swords and the fighting became more furious. They were no longer wounded by chance hits from a distance, but foot to foot with the foe they had only their strength and courage to trust to. Finding that his men were becoming exhausted, the consul rekindled their courage by bringing up the reserves from the second line. The front was re-formed, and these fresh troops attacking the wearied enemy with fresh weapons made a fierce charge in a dense body and broke their lines, and once broken they soon scattered in flight and rushed through the fields in the direction of their camp."
- Titus Livius, "Ab Urbe Condita", 9 BC
The "Roman" way of war does not seem to have been exclusive to the Romans! I suspect many of the Gauls fought the same way as well, although it is hard to tell, because by the nature of the recorded fights (recorded by Romans, fought with Romans), they might have been forced to use their swords as the Romans closed the distance quickly. However, the constant references to Gallic swords and swordsmen might just be because they truly did use their swords a lot by choice (although archeology proves not exclusively within a people or amongst peoples).
"... [the Franks] had a small body of cavalry about their leader, and these were the only ones armed with spears, while all the rest were foot soldiers having neither bows nor spears, but each man carried a sword and shield and one axe. Now the iron head of this weapon was thick and exceedingly sharp on both sides, while the wooden handle was very short. And they are accustomed always to throw these axes at one signal in the first charge and thus to shatter the shields of the enemy and kill the men."
- Procopius, Ὑπὲρ τῶν Πολέμων Λόγοι, "History of the Wars", ~550
"After the Saxons had spoken in this way, the Franks were amazed at the enormous size and fierce spirit of these men. They also wondered at their unfamiliar manner of dress, their arms, their hair flowing over their shoulders, and, above all, at the great constancy of their spirit. For they were dressed in military cloaks, and were equipped with long spears and stood leaning on small shields, with large knives at their sides [ad renes, lit. at their kidneys].
But Thiadrich was concerned for his own needs, and putting his trust in these men, he ordered them to prepare to assault the fortress. Leaving the presence of the king, the Saxons set up their fortified camp on the south side of the fortress in meadows adjacent to the river. At first light the next day, they took up their arms, attacked the outer works of the fortress, and burned them. After they had captured and burned the outer works, the Saxons formed a phalanx opposite the eastern gate of the main fortress. The men inside the walls, as they saw the phalanx being formed and realized that they were in extreme danger, boldly burst out of the gates and rushed against their adversaries in a blind rage. After both sides had hurled their spears, they began to fight with swords [telis emissis gladiis proinde res agitur].
A vicious battle ensued. Many died on both sides. The Thuringians were fighting for their fatherland, their wives and children, and finally for their own lives. The Saxons were fighting for glory and to gain land. There was a huge clamor from men encouraging each other, from the breaking of arms, and the groans of the dying. The entire day passed in this spectacle. Finally, when the dead lay everywhere, and cries were rising all over, and neither side had given any ground, the late hour finally brought the battle to an end. Many of the Thuringians were killed on this day, and many were wounded. The Saxon dead numbered six thousand."
- Witichindi Saxo, Res gestae Saxonicae sive annalium libri tres, 968
Compare Sallust's "postquam eo ventum est, unde a ferentariis proelium conmitti posset, maxumo clamore cum infestis signis concurrunt; pila omittunt, gladiis res geritur." with Widikund's "Clausi muris dum acies vident ordinatas ac se in ultimis neccessitatibus constitutos, audacter erumpunt portis caecoque furore irruunt in adversarios, et telis emissis gladiis proinde res agitur."
While similarities between the two can be drawn, the differences actually speak more, as it is clear the author made a conscious decision to edit the line, rather than just follow the antique model. Omittunt (discarded) becomes emissis (thrown); pila becomes telis; and Widikund clarifies with proinde.
"King Hacon chose men for his guard much according to strength and courage, just as his father Harald had done. Toralv the Strong, the son of Skolm, was there and walking by the king's side; he had helm, shield and spear and a sword which was called Fetbreid; it was said that he and the king were equally strong...
[...]
And when the armies came together, there was a hot and bloody battle; when they had shot their spears, the men drew their swords and then King Hacon and Toralv with him went forth by the standard and struck out on all sides."
- Pseudo-Snorri Sturluson, Heimskringla, ~1230
"King Olav had drawn up his lines where there was a hill, and his men stormed down on the bonders' army and thronged forth so hardily that the bonders' line bent so that the van of the king's line now stood where beforehand the rearguard of the bonders' army had stood. Many of the bonders were ready to flee, but the landed men and the landed men's huscarls stood firm and there was now a very sharp battle.
[...]
Then the bonders' army came forth on all sides; they who stood foremost hewed [hjoggu], but they [en þeir] who were next thrust with spears, and all who came up behind, shot with spears or arrows or cast stones or hand axes or javelins. The battle soon grew bloody and many fell on both sides. In the first spell there fell Arnljot Gellina, Gauka Tore, and Afrafasti and all their following; but each of them had felled one man or two and some several. Therefore the troop before the king's standard was thinned. The king then bade Tord bear the standard forth, and the king himself followed the standard with the troop of men whom he had chosen to be near him in the strife; the men who were in his following were the boldest with weapons and the best fitted out."
- Idem, Heimskringla, ~1230
This is an account of Stiklestad (1030). The "hewing" would have been done with axes or swords.
"Then the raiding party of Norwegians, which had great spoils, attacked Cennétig. When they had heard those noblemen being slain, they had left their raid and their booty, and had come hard and actively against Cennétig. Foreign, barbarous cries were raised there, and the noise of many war trumpets, and a crowd were saying Núi, nú! Then many arrows were loosed between them, and short spears, and finally they took to their heavy and hard-smiting swords. Nevertheless, God was helping the son of Gáethíne and his troops; the Norwegians were overcome, and left the place of battle; they went in rout after their bloody defeat."
- Anonymous, "Fragmentary Annals of Ireland"
"Almost at this time Rodolb came with his armies to plunder Osraige. Cerball son of Dúnlang assembled an army against them, and gave them battle, and routed the Norwegians. However, a large troop of the defeated people rode their horses up a high hill, and they were looking at the slain around them, and they saw their own people being killed in the manner in which they slaughtered sheep. Great passion seized them, and what they did was to draw their swords and take their arms, and to attack the Osraige so that they killed many of them; nevertheless they were driven back in rout. At Áth Muiceda that defeat was given. Then trouble occurred for Cerball himself there; that is, when the defeat was accomplished, and he was separated from his attendants, a group of the Norwegians came to him and took him captive. But through the Lord's help he was aided: he himself tore his clothes and the fetters that were on him, and he got away from them safely. Great indeed was the massacre that was made of the Norwegians there."
- Idem, "Fragmentary Annals of Ireland"
"Great wrath and wild fury took hold of Fergus thereat; and he permitted his men to work all the evil they could. They unloosed their sharp-pointed arrows and their keen-edged spears, and they drew their broad-grooved, straight-bladed swords from their terrible sheaths. And they multiplied the deeds of violence, and extended the ravages, and slew many sons of kings and princes and nobles of Ulster upon the green, to wit, fifty youths who were with Fiacha son of Conchobar and Daire son of Fedelmid. And these two high-born youths came to where they were, viz., Fiacha son of Conchobar and Daire son of Fedelmid, and Dubthach slew them both."
- Pseudo-Eoin M'Tavis, "Glenmasan manuscript", Late 15th Century
The extant manuscript is from the 15th century, but it is possible that it is a copy of a 13th century work.
"Some only thought of plunder while others sought to capture the town. And if they had all stormed the town with one accord as these few did, there is no question that they would that day have had this great and glorious city of the Pomeranians. But the vast wealth and booty of the suburbs blinded the ardor of the soldiers, and so Fortune saved their city from the Poles. Only a few stalwart knights set glory above riches. Casting their lances aside and seizing their swords they crossed the bridge and entered the city gate, but they were boxed in by a great mass of townsfolk and finally with difficulty forced to retreat."
- Anonymous, Cronice et gesta ducum sive principum Polonorum, ~1115
"... Nakane Kizo [中根喜蔵] and the [Ikko] Ikki came together with yari [鑓を合す], [Watanabe] Moritsuna [守綱] rushed under his [Nakane’s] yari, wielding his tachi [太刀], [and] cut Nakane, Nakane [then] abandoned his yari, [and] unsheathed his tachi and crossed swords [切合] [with Moritsuna]..."
- Anonymous, 寛永諸家系図伝, Kan'ei shoka keizu-den, ~1642, Translation by Me
Watanabe Moritsuna is perhaps better known as "Yari no Hanzo", for he was famed with the use of the spear, but evidently, could use a sword to defeat a spearman, and with some ease as well.*
"The Turk met him, sword in hand, and the Frank thrust his spear at him. But the Turk pushed the spearhead away from him with his shield and stepped forward to his enemy, putting himself in where the Frank’s spear had been."
- Usama ibn Munqidh, كتاب الاعتبار, The Book of Contemplation, 1183
"But these withstood his first onset sturdily, and owing to the iron thoraxi and bronze helmets with which their persons were protected, and the great shields which they held in front of them, repelled the spear thrusts. But when the struggle came to swords and the work required skill no less than strength, suddenly, from the hills, fearful peals of thunder crashed down, and vivid flashes of lightning darted forth with them."
- Plutarch, Βίοι Παράλληλοι, Bíoi Parállēloi, Parallel Lives, Early 2nd Century
"If you find it written that at this stage the Castilians cut their lances shorter than when they brought them, you should consider it to be true and have no doubts about it, because many of them, though expecting to fight on horseback, when once they saw that the battle was being fought on foot, cut down their lances so as to wield them to better advantage, an act that was to bring them more trouble than benefit.
Once they had let fly their lances, which caused little havoc to either side, and many of them heaped up in a trench between the two battle lines, they resorted to axes and swords. These swords were not as big as those used nowadays but were thick and narrow and known as estocs.
[...]
The King of Portugal, on seeing his vanguard broken open and the constable in such a tight spot, was greatly worried, as were all those with him, and charged ahead at all speed with his banner, crying out with mighty valour, Forward, my lords, forward! For Saint George, for Saint George! For Portugal, for Portugal! I am your king! As soon as he reached the spot where the harsh and unremitting struggle was taking place, with lances abandoned as of little use in such a mêlée, he began to strike out with his battleaxe with such lack of restraint and such determination as though he were a mere knight anxious to win renown. Álvaro González de Sandoval chanced to attack him; he was a comely and well-built young man and a valiant knight who had married that very year. When the king raised his axe and brought it down to smite him, he parried the blow, seized the axe and yanked so hard that he tore it from his hands and brought the king down on both knees. He was, however, at once lifted to his feet. When Álvaro González raised the axe to strike him with it, the king awaited the blow and seized the axe back from him in the same way. When the king was trying to strike at him again, however, the young man already lay dead, slain by others present who had not managed to do so more swiftly, because each man had to look after himself."
- Fernão Lopes, Cronica del Rei Dom Joham I, 1443
This is an account of Aljubarrota (1385).
"King Pedro and the prince left Navarrete with all their companies on Saturday morning; they all dismounted and drew up their battle-lines in the way that we have outlined, a good distance before they reached the army of King Enrique. The latter also drew up his forces in the way that we have described, but before battle was joined, a number of horsemen and the soldiers following the banner of the town of Santesteban, all of whom had been with King Enrique, went over to King Pedro. Then the armies moved forward and came to close quarters. Count Sancho, King Enrique’s brother, Sir Bertrand, and all the knights who followed the banner of the Sash launched an attack on the vanguard advancing under the Duke of Lancaster and the constable. Those fighting alongside King Pedro and the prince bore red crosses set on white fields, whereas on that day those fighting alongside King Enrique wore sashes. They collided with such ferocity that all their lances fell to the ground, and so they began to strike each other with swords, axes and clubs, King Pedro’s men crying out, For Guyenne, Saint George!, and King Enrique’s troops For Castile, Saint James! They struck at each other with such force that the prince’s vanguard began to reel back about one pace, some of them being knocked to the ground, so that King Enrique’s men started to believe that they were winning and closed in, striking at them once more."
- Idem, Cronica del Rei Dom Fernando, 1443
"Another day, some of the most adventurous youths in the army among whom were Juan de Astúñiga, Ruy Diaz de Mendoza, Pero Lopez de Ayala, and others, having agreed together to attack with their lances at the gate of the barricade, the youth Pero Niño learned of their intent, and went to ask arms of the King: then he donned them and went with the others on foot. When they were come near to the barricade he left them, and went forward alone to the palisade against the tower which men call that of Villaviciosa; and he crossed the moat with great danger and toil of body, for he was within range of the cross-bows of the city. The men of the city had set all around their ramparts, and especially in this place, planks studded with sharp nails and covered with earth, to run the assailants through. None the less Pero Niño climbed the scarp, reached the barricade and fought hard against those he found there, striving with all his might to break the palisade. There he lost his lance. He grasped his sword and received many a blow from lance and axe and sword, yet notwithstanding he succeeded in tearing out a stake from the palisade, and God be thanked, came very well out of this action."
- Gutierre Díaz de Gámez, El Victorial, ~1450
"Pero Niño came thither on horseback. His arms were a coat, a bassinet with gorget, according to the fashion of the time, leg pieces and a great tilting buckler which had been given him at Cordova as very fine, the which had belonged to the good knight Don Egas. The mellay was so close, and so thick the blows that were given on one side and the other, that it was stern to see. Even in the beginning of the battle Pero Niño had his horse wounded. He dismounted, set himself at the head of his men and advanced, offering and giving such strong sword-strokes, that those who found themselves face to face with him thought that they bad to do not with a youth, but with a man robust and grown. Each of his blows was signal: from some did he shear a great part of their shields; others did he strike upon the head with his sword; those best armed did he lay low upon the ground, or at least make touch it with their hands, and by reason of their hurt leave their place empty as they withdrew to the rear. There, among those of the city, was there a famous foot soldier named Gomez Domao, a very strong man; hardly did he press Pero Niño and weighty blows did he strike. Well would Pero Niño have repaid them, but Gomez so made good use of his shield that he could not be touched. At length they came to grips one with the other and gave each other such sword blows upon the head, that Pero Niño averred that sparks flew from his eyes. But Pero Niño struck Gomez so hard above the shield, that he split it for a hands-breadth and his head down to the eyes; and that was the end of Gomez Domao.
While Pero Niño was doing among the enemies of his lord the King as a wolf does among the sheep when there is no shepherd to defend them, it befell that an arrow struck him in the neck. He received this wound at the beginning of the battle. The arrow had knit together his gorget and his neck; but such was his will to bring to a finish the enterprise that he had entered upon that he felt not his wound, or hardly at all; only it hindered him much in the movement of the upper part of his body. And this pricked him on the more to fight, so that in a few hours he had swept a path clean before him and had forced the enemy to withdraw over the bridge close against the city. Several lance stumps were still in his shield, and it was that which hindered him most. When he had got so far, the people of the city, seeing the havoc that he wrought, fired many crossbows at him, even as folk worry a bull that rushes out into the middle of the ring. He went forward with his face uncovered and a great bolt there found its mark, piercing his nostrils through most painfully, whereat he was dazed, but his daze lasted but little time. Soon he recovered himself, and the pain only made him press on more bitterly than ever. At the gate of the bridge there were steps; and Pero Niño found himself sorely bestead when he had to climb them. There did he receive many sword blows on head and shoulders. At the last, he climbed them, cut himself a path and found himself so pressed against his enemies that sometimes they hit the bolt embedded in his nose, which made him suffer great pain. It happened even that one of them, seeking to cover himself, hit a great blow on the bolt with his shield and drove it further into his head.
Weariness brought the battle to an end on both sides. When Pero Niño went back, his good shield was tattered and all in pieces; his sword had its gilded hilt almost broken and wrenched away and the blade was toothed like a saw and dyed with blood. And well do I think that until that day Pero Niño never had been able to glut himself in an hour with the toil he craved: for the truth is that the fight lasted for two whole hours, and that his armour was broken in several places by lance-heads, of which some had entered the flesh and drawn blood, although the coat was of great strength. It had been given him by a great lady; should I say by a queen, I should not lie."
- Idem, El Victorial, ~1450
This chronicle was written by a soldier (Gutierre Díaz de Gámez) who was close to Pero Niño.
"The arms that he bore were these: a cuirass, vambraces, a steel cap, a sword and a targe; and eagerly did he begin his battle against the Moors. The galley of Fernando Niño could not get near. In the captain's galley so great was the press to bear off the galeasse of the Moors, which had run aground, and to attack, and to defend themselves (for the Moorish galley was higher than ours) that men took no thought for the captain, for only those who were on the poop had seen him leap across. He cried out to them for help, but in so great a noise he was not heard. Every moment more men came up on the land side, where there were already many folk. They came into the sea to fight and their number grew so great that our men could no longer make any resistance.
The good knight, seeing that he would have no help unless it were from God and that he must go through with this undertaking to its end by himself, fought so lustily that it is a matter hard to believe except for those who saw him. He struck such good blows, killed and wounded so many, that in a short time he had fought himself free of them all and had driven them before him into the middle of the ship. There he laid hands on the Arraez of the galley (who is the Admiral) and having wounded him he made him Ray Rock still in one place, without daring to move.
Already day was breaking, and the Moors saw that all this havoc was wrought by one single man in their midst. They turned upon him like mad dogs and struck at him so hard that he could offer no resistance and they bore him backwards almost to the poop. The good knight, when he saw himself in such a pass, called upon St Mary to help him and there made a solemn vow. Then he hurled himself upon them, fierce as a lion who throws himself upon his prey, striking, killing, driving them before him on to the deck, which he swept cleanup to the prow. Then his own galley came up, and his men climbed into the Moorish galley, and she remained in their hands but she was run aground.
There, on the prow, he found himself face to face with a Moorish knight, of whom he had much to tell later, and he swore that this Moor struck him so hard on the head with his sword, that his knees bent beneath the blow. Here did Pero Niño receive several great wounds."
- Idem, El Victorial, ~1450
"The English were on their feet now, and advancing step by step towards our men – and our men (God be their guard!) were closing on them. At their front the English had set a body of archers who loosed with such ferocity that their arrows were like a flying cloud, and when they fell upon the French the clattering hail on their shining helms was like the hammering of smiths on an anvil. But their volleys did no damage to our French, and the archers drew aside as the men-at-arms closed in. Jehan d'Évreux was running through the ranks calling to the English:
Listen! Once you’ve locked with the French and start pushing them back, lay down your spears and go at them with axe and sword – cut and hew their spears and they’ll soon be routed.
The English approved of this. They joined with our French in a fearsome clash, both sides ramming their spears at their enemy’s chests, and in this first shock the English drove at the French so awesomely that they forced them back fully twenty feet.
The struggle lasted long. It was bitter, intense. The English were many and were brave and bold, and the French were fierce as raging lions, standing rooted, stabbing, thrusting. Then all the English, great and small, laid their spears down at their feet and drew their swords and clutched shining axes and burnished faussars to hack and hew our Frenchmen’s spears. Bertrand was roaring:
Hold firm, brave friends, in God’s name! You’ll see the English routed now – a valiant squadron’s coming from the right! Honour will be ours today, the prize craved by the noble! Don’t drop your spears, my men – stand firm and fierce and thrust with all your might!
And thrust the French did, forcing the English back a full twelve feet. The English tried to recover their spears, but in vain: they were about to be in trouble now – their pride was their undoing. Pride has never helped men rise – it always brings them down.
The French clutched their massive lances and bravely thrust against the English, who reeled back in dismay. They dearly wanted to recover their lances but couldn't – they were being pushed further and further from where they lay. And French were attacking now from both flanks, falling on them from right and left, hewing with axes, cleaving heads, shoulders, arms, and staving shining bascinets; others were attacking with swords and daggers, probing gaps in armour to find flesh."
- Johannes Cuvelier, La Chanson de Bertrand du Guesclin, ~1380
This is an account of Chiset (1373). The English plan to close with sidearms quickly, but this leads to their defeat as they were outreached. But the French too soon drop their lances for their swords to take advantage of their early successes! While reach is clearly powerful, it cannot do everything.*
"Thither went the twenty esquires in armour, with their perpuntes [pourpoints] and their gonios [hauberks], and their iron caps, with swords, but without lances, which they could not well wield within the towers. They went in, and as they entered they were taken into a house where there were thirty Saracens, who seized and bound them as they entered. Three of the esquires who saw what treachery was being done, drew their swords and ascended the staircase of the tower; the Saracens pursued, but could not overtake them. They got on to the top of the tower and defended it well, raising a cry for help. Those in ambush heard them and ran to their help. While the Saracens of Almaçora fought with them the knights and people in ambush came up. On their way thither they found a beam the Saracens had cut to make an algarada, for which, however, it did not answer; they got over the moat of the town, and putting the beam against the tower climbed up by it with the help of leather belts which those on the tower let down, so that the Saracens could not defend the tower. When the Saracens saw that, they got out of the tower and fled; but many were taken, and besides all their goods and stores. So was Almaçora taken."
- Jaume I, Commentari dels feyts esdeuenguts en la uida del molt alt senyor, &c., 1276
"I immediately put on a perpunte, and an iron cap, and sword in hand, with eight knights equipped in the same fashion, went to the hurdles. I had previously sent there a mattress and a bolster. As I lay thus with my perpunte unlaced, the Saracens saw that the camp was asleep; they knew that my pennon was there, and that I myself must be in my tent. They therefore made a sally, with fully forty men with shields, and up to a hundred and seventy more in all. On the wall and on the barbican the Saracens had crossbows ready, and the others brought fire with them. There were two esquires at two of the hurdles on the look-out against the town, and when they saw the enemy they said, To arms! to arms! lo! here are the Saracens! All got up instantly and put on their iron caps; I myself had brought a sword from Monzon called Tizo, which was a very good one and lucky to those who handled it. I would rather use it than a lance, and therefore gave mine to an esquire who attended me.
When my people in the camp heard the noise, all went out accoutred as I was; the Saracens left two torches fully burning near the hurdles a little in front of us. We drove them before us; they turned their backs and fled till in the direction of the barbican into which we actually drove them. We saw that we could not reach them, for they were quicker than we, for they did not carry either gonios, or perpuntes; they had only shields and lances, and so they got into the barbican, the other Saracens defending them by throwing stones from the wall. Seeing that we could not do them harm, and that we might receive it ourselves, we returned to the camp protecting ourselves by our shields. And believe me, reader, when I say this to be truth, that twice did I uncover my whole body that the Saracens might wound me, so that, if I had to raise the siege, I could say that it was my wound that made me raise it. But our Lord Jesus Christ knows how things should be and should be done. He makes those to whom He wishes well, act for the best. He took such care of me that I received no wound, and took the town as will be told afterwards."
- Idem, Commentari dels feyts esdeuenguts en la uida del molt alt senyor, &c., 1276
"Meantime Cardona's men approached the palisade and set fire to it, but could not get to the fonevol, for I came up with the men and prevented it. On this occasion Blasco Destada, a young knight, made trial of his arms; and went up with the rest, helm on head and lance in hand, and fought with the people of Balaguer; and followed by Joan Martinez Dezleva on foot, with shield on arm and sword in hand, both attacked the Balaguerians as they were re-entering, overtook them in the moat of the castle, and wounded one of the horsemen who had attempted to burn the fonevol. Blasco de Estada himself went a stone's throw into the moat, wounded there a knight with his lance, and got away without receiving a blow from any one of them, nor from stones which they threw from the top of the wall."
- Idem, Commentari dels feyts esdeuenguts en la uida del molt alt senyor, &c., 1276
An alternate translation of an alternate manuscript: "... Juan Martinez de Eslava went on foot, armed with his shield and with his sword in his hand. And, like this, he overtook many of those of the town who went on horseback, and he wounded a horse when they were retreating after having tried to burn the fenèvol."
"Meantime the King of Mallorca riding on a white steed came up. His name was Sheikh Abohehie; and he called to his people Roddo, Roddo meaning steady. There were [in the breach] twenty or thirty Christian footmen with shields, and some men-at-arms among them. On the other side were the Saracens with their bucklers, and swords drawn on a line, but neither dared to close. When the knights with their armoured horses got in, they at once charged the Saracens; but so great was the multitude of the latter, that their lances stopped the horses, and they reared up as they could not get through the thick ranks of the enemy. So they had to turn. And by turning back a little, more horsemen managed to enter the breach till there were forty or fifty of them; still horsemen and footmen with their shields were so mixed up, and so close to the Saracens, that they could strike one another with their swords, and no one dared put out his arm for fear the sword should reach his hand from the other side. Presently, however, there were from forty to fifty knights with their horses all clad in armour, and they went against the Saracens, and cried with one voice, Help us, Saint Mary, Mother of our Lord! And I cried, Shame, knights! and so they attacked the Saracens, and drove them back."
- Idem, Commentari dels feyts esdeuenguts en la uida del molt alt senyor, &c., 1276
"Mago stationed his 10,000 men at the gates, some to sally out at a favorable opportunity with swords alone (since spears would be of no use in such a narrow space), and others to man the parapets."
- Appianos Alexandreus, "Roman History", 2nd Century
"... and also the long swords [longues espees] that our archers and servants had performed a great feat."
- Philippe de Commynes, Chronique et hystoire, 1498, Translation by Me
"After the formation is arrayed, the drum sounds, and when the crossbowmen are a hundred and fifty paces [~225m] from the enemy [贼, lit. bandit], at once, they loose their arrows, and when the archers are sixty paces [~90m] from the enemy, at once, they loose their arrows. If the enemy arrives within twenty paces [~30m], together, the archers and crossbowmen immediately abandon their bows and crossbows, and order the reserve [驻队人, lit. stationed team people] to collect them. The archers bind their arms [i.e., sleeves] first, and then carry their swords or clubs [刀棒] with them, and promptly join the front to fight vigorously together."
- Du You, 通典, Tong Dian, 801, Translation by Me
Nominally, according to the "新唐书", each Tang soldier was to have a sword. While this may not have played out in reality, taking the above text at face value, at least many of them had them as for it to be mentioned at all.*
"And on the other side the Lords Percy, warned of the coming of their enemies, ordered forward their vanguard led by the Earl of Douglas, and then when they came in sight of each other the archers dismounted uttering a loud and horrible cry which was dreadful to hear, and then began to march at a good pace in good order against each other, and the archers to draw so fast and thick that it seemed to the beholders like a thick cloud, for the sun which at that time was bright and clear then lost its brightness so thick were the arrows, and this was helped by the dust which new about together with the breath of the men who began to get heated, so that the air was quite darkened. After the arrows were exhausted they put their hands to swords and axes with which they began to slay each other, and the leaders of the advance guards striking their horses with their spurs and with lances couched struck each other."
- Jean de Wauvrin, Recueil des Croniques et Anchiennes Istories de la Grant Bretaigne, à présent nommé Engleterre, 1472
"And on the other side the French, who had been aware since the evening before that they would be fought on the morrow, when the day had come and they knew in truth that the English were drawing near them, whom they perceived from afar by the dust raised by the men and horses; and also were assured thereof by their spies and skirmishers, whom they had on the plains; immediately and without delay put themselves in order for fighting without forming vanguard or rearguard, but placed themselves all together in one large body, except that they appointed a certain number of horsemen, the greater part of whom were Lombards and the others Gascons, whose guides and leaders were Le Borgne Quaquetan, sir Théaulde de Valpergue, and some other Gascon captains, such as La Hire, Pothon, and others, and this for the purpose of dashing into their enemies in the rear, either right through them or otherwise, so as to their greatest advantage they might be able to do them damage; and the rest, all on foot, arranged themselves, as has been said, in a single body; then they began to march very proudly against their enemies, their lances lowered; which attitude being seen by the English, they rushed very vigorously upon them. At the onset there was a great noise and great shouting with tumultuous sounds of the trumpets and clarions; the one side cried, Saint Denis! and the others Saint George! And so horrible was the shouting that there was no man so brave or confident that he was not in fear of death; they began to strike with axes and to thrust with lances, then they put their hands to their swords, with which they gave each other great blows and deadly strokes; the archers of England and the Scots who were with the French began to shoot one against the other so murderously that it was a horror to look upon them, for they carried death to those whom they struck with full force. After the shooting, the opponents attacked each other very furiously, hand to hand; and this battle was on a Thursday, the seventeenth day of August, commencing about two hours after noon."
- Idem, Recueil des Croniques et Anchiennes Istories de la Grant Bretaigne, à présent nommé Engleterre, 1472
They use their lances and axes, and then swords, presumably as they close with one another.
"THEN the duke with great courage made his army march forward and the English and Hollanders did likewise, and the archers of the two parties began to shoot so briskly that there seemed to be a cloud and a canopy over the field from the thickness of the arrows; then they took to lances and pikes, with which they killed each other, then to axes, swords, and leaden clubs, with which they smote each other with so much force that those they reached fell to the ground; mercy had no place there, for it was only with grievous hurt that any could rise again; and each one was so engaged in defending himself against his assailant, that with great difficulty could anyone aid his cousin or his brother."
- Idem, Recueil des Croniques et Anchiennes Istories de la Grant Bretaigne, à présent nommé Engleterre, 1472
"In this battle the Scots had many great advantages that is to wit, the high hills and mountains, a great wind with them, and a sudden rain, all contrary to our bows and archers. It is not to be doubted, but the Scots fought manly, and were determined whether to win to the field or to die; they were also well appointed as was possible at all points with arms and harness; So that few of them were slain with arrows, howbeit the bills did beat and hew them down with some pain and danger to Englishmen.
The said Scots were so plainly determined to abide battle and not to flee, that they put from them their horses and also their boots and shoes, and fought in the vamps of their hose[, and] every man for the most part with a keen and sharp spear of .v. [5] yards [~4.5 meters, or 15 feet] long, and a target afore him. And when their spears failed and were spent, then they fought with great and sharp swords, making little or no noise..."
- Pseudo-Richarde Faques, The trewe encountre or batayle lately don betwene Englande and Scotlande, 1513
I chose to modernize the spelling, rather than translating it, so it is a bit rough around the edges to read. These accounts are regarding Flodden Field.
"The said Scots were so surely harnessed with complete harnesses, Jacks, almain rivets, splints, pavises, and other habiliments that [the] shot of arrows in regard did them no harm, and when it came to hand strikes of bill and halberds, they were so mighty, large, strong, and great men that they would not fall when jjjj [4] or v [5] bills struck them on one of them at once[;] howbeit the our bills quit them [the English] very well and did more good that day than bows, for they shortly disappointed the Scots of their long spears, wherein was their greatest trust, and when they came to handstrokes, though the scots fought sore and valiantly with their swords, yet they could not resist the bills that lighted so thick and sore upon them."
- Thomas Ruthall, letter to Thomas Wolsey, 1513
This is likewise only modernized, with some additional punctuation added.
In short, the pikes of the Scots were broken, and the said Scots fell to their swords. Now perhaps the Scots lost because of the superiority of the bill over the sword, but I think this is too simple of a reading. The Scots had gained some success during the battle, and Lord Home's battle pushed back Edward Howard's wing.
And according to the La Rotta de Scocesi, James's battle pushed back Thomas Howard's:
"Evenly went the conflict for a long time, advancing, recoiling again and again, each man loving honour and the prize of victory more than himself. But the King of Scots at last advanced from his company with many of his barons and struck his enemies with such force that he drove them back more than a long bow-shot.
James had a levelled lance, massive, hard, supple, and strong, and came forward with a rush to bring an evil fate upon his enemies. And before he had that broken he made more than five suffer death. Then he took his sharp blade in hand and as many as he met he struck to the ground."
- Anonymous, La Rotta de Scocesi, Early 16th Century
This poem was well informed, although I suspect there to be some exaggeration. If we do trust this information, the onset of the Scots gained the Scots early success, probably aided by the length of their pikes. Soon after, due to their pikes breaking (although I suspect many of them had dropped their pikes by choice to support those in front), they fall to their long swords. But their momentum is checked, likely in part due to the terrain, and seemingly partly because (at the very least, most of) the English held onto their bills and halberds, the English retake the advantage, and drive back the Scots in turn (I think it is fair to assume that the large majority of the English did not fall to their swords; although perhaps some of them did, seeing as some of the English were being pushed back, and those who let go of their bills likely could not regain them; and some of the Scots may have simply forced a swordfight with some of the English by closing the distance, since the Scots were pushing forward (as said); but this is conjecture, although based on the other accounts above).
Again, even if the halberds gave the English an advantage in this battle, virtually all of the sources agree that (most of) the Scots fought well, and clearly, the swords were important to them (otherwise they would have immediately lost after the shattering of their pikes). The reasoning as to why the English won Flodden cannot be shortened as "because they had halberds, and the Scots had pikes and swords". The English were starving, poorly equipped, outnumbered, consisting of the men who were not taken to Flanders, and with nobles who hated one another and with feuding between the captain general and his subordinates, with an army that had outdated artillery and whose bows (their national weapon) were ineffectual (with even the wind facing against their arrows, as well as the "sudden rain"). If they won, it was because they fought extremely well (as individuals and as a whole), and if you must be given an answer that is even simpler, it was because God Himself ordained it, seeing as by all means, they were disadvantaged in almost every regard. Any advantage as minor as what weapon they were using was clearly not the only deciding factor (seeing as, again, the Scots did fight well, and did not simply crumble at the onset or soon after). The English archers, who likely consisted a meaningful portion of the English, perhaps would have had been forced to use their sidearms as well (as far as I know, the sources on Flodden turn the archers mostly invisible after they shoot).
"The battle did not last long, for the Burgundian archers were armed with great swords [grandes espees], per the ordinance given to them by the Duke of Burgundy, & after the shot had passed, they delivered such great cuts with those swords that they would cut a man through the middle of the body, & an arm, & a thigh, depending on how the cut landed [s'adonnoit]: and the Liégeois (who could not endure the strength of the archers) [began] to flee, & each one saving themselves, as best as they could [qui mieux mieux], & finding no refuge, except in the dark night (which soon became obscure) and the Duke of Burgundy wished to go after [and] pass the night, and continue the chase, but those who were in charge, did not support it, for the dangers that could arise from it."
- Olivier de la Marche, Les mémoires de messire Olivier de la Marche, ~1502, Translation by Me
"On the other hand, when hand-to-hand fighting began, a good part of the English archers, having quickly thrown away their bows as is their custom and taken up the daggers and the swords which they always had ready to hand, rushed at a great pace into the advancing enemy."
- Polydori Vergilii, Anglicae Historiae, 1513
"In this place, when as the conflict had continued more than three hours, the English horsemen, oppressed with multitude, were put to flight. But the footmen, having spent almost all their arrows, marched forth close together, with their swords drawn, and by help of some part of the horsemen, came safe to Magdune. At the first encounter was killed about a thousand Englishmen, a hundred were taken, amongst whom was John lord Talbot. Of the French party were slain more than six hundred soldiers."
- Idem, Anglicae Historiae, 1513
"So after it began to be daylight, the alarm being sounded on either party, the battle was begun: first they fought with arrows from afar, and afterward with swords hand to hand."
- Idem, Anglicae Historiae, 1513
"On the third day of Iuly while this enterprise was done at Morles, certaine Frenchemen to the nomber of CCC. horsemen came nere to the castle of Guysnes and kept theim selfe in a close couert and so appered viii. or x. horsemen and came nere Guysnes: out of the Castle came viii. Englishe archers and issued out of the gate and fell with the Frenche horsemen in skyrmished: to the Frenchemennes, reskue came iiii. men of armes and skyrmished with the archers whiche were a fote. Then out of Guysnes issued xii. dimilances all Welshemen and rāne boldely to ye Frenchemen in reskue of the fotemen, Then the whole bend of Frenchemen issued out and set on the Welshemen, the fotemen shotte while arrowes lasted and were faine to fight with swordes, the Welshmen kept themselfes together and entred into the bend of Frenchemen and brake their speres and then fought so with swordes that they made away, so that thei escaped from the bend of CCC. horsemen, and of the Frenchemen were slayne iii. men and v. horse, the fotemen were ouerpressed and solde their liues dere, for the Frenchemen slew them all and would take none prisoner, they were so angry with the kyllyng of their horse."
- Edward Hall, The Vnion of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre & Yorke, 1548
"But the Kyng when the sawe Henry passe ouer the marras cōmaunded his men with all violence to set vpon theim. They by and by with a sodein clamour lette arrowes flee at theim. On the other syde they paied theim home manfully again with the same. But when they came nere together they laied on valeauntly with swerdes."
- Richard Grafton, A continuacion of the chronicle of England, begynnyng wher Iohn Hardyng left, 1543
"[Then] came James of Douglas and his rout [retinue],
And [they] shot upon them with a shout,
And wounded them with arrows fast,
Then [syne] with their swords, at the last,
They rushed among them hardily."
- John Barbour, The Brus, ~1375
"Then the threatening mass of the French crossbowmen brought back grim night to the battlefield with the thick darkness of their bolts, but this darkness was repelled by the deadly shower of arrows shot by the young English archers, driven by desperation to frenzied resistance. Also there flew through the air shafts of ash, which the French greeted at a distance, as their troops, packed together in dense bands, protected their breasts with a close-fitting line of shields and turned aside their heads from the missiles. Then our archers, having emptied their quivers in vain, and armed only with shields of leather and swords, were told by the passion boiling within them to attack the heavily-armed French and to sell dearly their deaths which they thought would be the settlement for that day’s work. But then with a roar the prince of Wales was upon the Frenchmen. Hewing them down with his sharp sword, he cut through their spears, repelled their blows, made their efforts a thing of nought, lifted the fallen English and taught the enemy how furious is the desperation in the breast of a man clothed for battle.
Meanwhile the captal de Buch was going around the French flank, withdrawing from the hill where he had just left the prince at the foot of its slope. He went round the battlefield without being seen and came to the lowlying place of the first station of the crowned one. Then he climbed to higher parts of the field along a path last trodden by the French, so that, suddenly breaking forth from his concealment, he showed us by the holy ensigns of St George that a friend was there. Then the prince, feeling shame, fought to break through the French line before the captain could make his attack in that quarter of the battle which was only defended by French backs. And so
With headlong speed the prince’s men in fury
Charge the close-packed columns, forcing a way
Through weapons and through masses of the foe,
In search of the breast in its safe covering hid
as the prince charged and broke through the enemy line, laying about him with his sword."
- Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicon Angliae temporibus Edwardi II et Edwardi III, ~1360
"But Sir Maurice Berkeley, the son of Sir Thomas and a hero who was worthy of his illustrious parents, took no notice of this. For the whole of the two year expedition of the prince he had commanded troops under his banner, and had never failed on his own initiative to be among the leading men in the front line, when the horn for battle first sounded. At this hour, just as usual, he was among the first to attack the enemy, and he did thunderous deeds against the French which are worthy of everlasting praise. Finding himself in the middle of the Dauphin’s troops, he dealt savage blows against those around him with his armed hand, and had no thought of fleeing from the French as long as he saw them still on their feet. Totally intent on what was in front of him and never looking behind him for his own men or gazing up in the air for signs, he single-handedly pursued the escort which was keeping the mighty Dauphin safe. When his lance and then his sword and other attacking weapons had been broken by the furious manliness of his assaults on the escort, he at the last found himself alone in the middle of a crowd of Frenchmen. Terribly wounded but still alive he was taken prisoner and retained for ransom."
- Idem, Chronicon Angliae temporibus Edwardi II et Edwardi III, ~1360
"Then the battle raged most fiercely, and our archers notched their arrows and shot the points into the flanks, ceaselessly renewing the fight. And when they had run out of arrows, snatching up the axes, stakes, swords, and spear-points that were scattered among them, they struck the enemy down, broke them, and cleaved them. For God, powerful and merciful, who is ever-wondrous in His works, who desired to show His mercy to us, and who was pleased that the crown of England should continue to remain invincible under the grace of our king, His soldier, and that little band, as soon as the lines had come together and the battle begun, increased the strength of our men who had been weakened and withered from lack of supplies, stripped them of their dread, and gave them fearless hearts. It had never been seen before, not even by our experienced men, that the English had ever attacked their enemies more boldly, fearlessly, or willfully: that same just Judge, who desired to pierce through the prideful multitude of the enemy with a thunderbolt of retribution, turned His face from them, broke their strength—bow, shield, sword, and formation."
- Anonymous, Gesta Henrici Quinti, 1417
"... I then spurr'd to them, where I began to remonstrate to Monsieur de Termes his Gentlemen, that it was not above nine or ten days since we had fought with the Italians, and beaten them, and now that we should fight with the Spaniards to obtain greater honor, must they escape from us? Who thereupon with one voice all cryed out, It does not stick at us, It does not stick at us. I then ask'd them if they would promise me to charge so soon as I should have made the Harquebusiers betake themselves to their Swords, to run in upon them, which they did assure me they would upon pain of their lives... and thereupon ran to my Harquebusiers, where being come, I told them, that it was now no longer time to shoot, but that we must fall on to the Sword. Captains, my Camrades, whenever you shall happen to be at such a feast as this, press your followers, speak first to one, and then to another, bestir your selves, and doubt not but by this means you will render them valiant throughout, if they but half so before. They all on a suddain clap'd hands to their Swords, when so soon as Captain Mons, who was a little before, and Monsieur de Cental, who was on one side, saw the first Troop shut down their Beavers, and saw me run to the Harquebusiers, and in an instant their Swords in their hands, they knew very well that I had met with Lads of mettle, and began to draw near. I for my part lighted from my horse, taking a Halbert in my hand (which was my usual weapon in fight) and all of us ran headlong to throw our selves in amongst the Enemy."
- Blaize de Montluc, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
As a tangent, Montluc mentions twice that he preferred the halberd: "... and I catcht up a Halbert, for I ever lov'd to play with that kind of Cudgel...". Of course, other captains preferred the sword and target, or the two handed sword, or the partisan, or other weapons.
"We marcht straight up to them, and so soon as they were come up within arrow shot, our Harquebuzeers gave their volley all at once, and then clapt their hands to their swords, as I had commanded, and we ran on to come to blows; but so soon as we came within two or three pikes length, they turn'd their backs with as great facility as any Nation that ever I saw, and we pursued them as far as the River, close by the Town, and there were four or five of our Soldiers who followed them to the other side."
- Idem, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
"These orders being given, all of us both Foot and Horse march'd directly towards the Enemy, and when I expected their Harquebusiers should have thrown themselves into the hollow, so soon as they should see our men come full drive upon them, they quite contrary march'd straight up to our men, and all at a clap gave fire within less than four Pikes length of one another. Now I had given order to our men, that so soon as they had powr'd in their shot, without standing to charge again, they should run up to them, and fall to the Sword, which they also did, and I with the Pikes ran to the end of the hollow, and fell in desperately amongst them. In the mean time Ydrou and Tilladet charg'd Monsieur de Trinitat, and put him to rout, and our Harquebusiers and theirs threw themselves altogether into the hollow: but ours had the upper hand, and our Pike men had thrown away their Pikes, and were fallen to't with the Sword, and so couragiously fighting we came all up to the Wagons, Captain Mons, and all, which were all overturn'd in a moment, and all their men put to flight towards two houses which stood in the bottom of the plain, where, still pursuing our Victory, and the Horse still firing amongst them, very few of them reach'd the houses."
- Idem, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
The pikemen eventually discard their pikes for their swords here. The fighting must have become quite close, perhaps caused by their fellow harquebusiers using their swords.*
"The Enemy seeing us come on with such resolution, and the Cavalry following in our Rear, thought it the wisest course to retire. I was by this time advanced where we were plying one another, with good round vollies of shot, at fifty paces distance, and we had a good mind to fall on to the Sword, when the Marquess, and another Gentleman with him, came himself on horseback to stay me. I think he did ill in it; for had we all passed thorough, we had certainly pursued them fighting up to the very Gates of Naples. There was in this place very many on both sides beaten to the ground, that never rose again, and I admire how I escaped, but my hour was not come."
- Idem, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
"I then immediately made fifteen or twenty Soldiers leap in after the four Captains, and as all these were within, le Bourg, Signior Cornelio, and the Count de Gayas passed and entred into the Fort. I caused the Torches to be set upon the Rampire, that we might see, and not kill one another, and my self entred by the same way Signior Cornelio had gone before me. Now neither Pikes, Halberts, nor Harquebuzes could serve us for any use here, for we were at it with Swords and Steeletto's, with which we made them leap over the Curtains by the same way they had entred, excepting those who were killed within. There were yet however some remaining in the Tower, when Captain Charry came up to us, though but eight days before he had received an Harquebuz shot in his head, and such a one as that thereupon we had given him for dead, notwithstanding there he was with his Sword and Target, and a Morrion upon his head, ever the Cap that cover'd his wound: a good heart will ever manifest itself; for though he was desperately hurt, yet would he have his share of the fight."
- Idem, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
"... when so soon as it was broad day, he opened the Postern, telling them that the Soldiers who came in with the Priest were laid to sleep, being tir'd out with the long labour they had sustein'd the day before, and so soon as they were all in, the Scot suddainly clap'd to the Gate, and as suddainly Captain Favas start up, and fell upon them, without giving them time, saving a very few, to give fire to their Harquebuzes, as ours did, who had them all ready; nevertheless they defended themselves with their Swords, so that six of mine were hurt, and fifteen or sixteen of this Company were slain upon the place, of which Corporal Ianin was one (which was a very great misfortune to us) together with a Brother of his, the rest were led into the Cellar ty'd two and two together, for there were already more prisoners in the Castle, than Soldiers of our own."
- Idem, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
"I had now nothing left me but my six Harquebusiers, my Cross-bows having already spent all their Arrows; nevertheless to shew that their hearts were not down, I caus'd them to hold their Swords ready drawn in the one hand, and their Bows in the other to serve instead of a Buckler."
- Idem, The Commentaries of Messire Blaize de Montluc, 1592
"Have some of the ranks lie in ambush. Have the archers dismount, with yourself in the front line. And let many grizzled warriors be in the lead, for such are both battle-hardened and obedient. Younger men of lesser rank may be very keen for battle, but as soon as you turn your back, their ardor is extinguished. So put trusty men in the van and in the rear, and some also in the wings, both left and right. Then, as they approach the opposing force, let them meet them head on and raise a shout. They should let fly their arrows while yet at some distance; as they draw closer, attack with their spears; and when they engage in the fray, use sword and axe, grab hold of the collar, fight tooth and nail! Stand firm, never show your back to the enemy. Pierce him through, or else die fighting."
- Yusuf Khass Hajib, Kutadgu Bilig, 1070
"When it was the night of al-Aqaba or the night of Badr, the Messenger of God, may God send blessings and peace upon him, said to those with him, How do you fight? Then stood up 'Asim ibn Thabit ibn Abi al Aqlam, [and] he then took a bow and he took arrows, then he said, O' Messenger of God, when the people were within two hundred cubits [المائتي ذراع], or around so, it was the shooting of bows, and when the people came closer until they reached us, or we reached them, it was pushing with spears until they broke, [and] then when they broke, we casted them aside and we grasped the sword, then he stepped forward and he drew [his sword], then he said, and it was the struggle of the sword. Then the Messenger of God, may God send blessings and peace upon him, said, With this, war is revealed; whoever does battle, let them battle as 'Asim does battle."
- Ibn Hudayl, Kitāb 'ayn al-adab wa-al-siyāsah wa-zayn al-ḥasab wa-al-riyāsah, Late 14th Century, Translation by Me
"From the Banū Makhzūm: Hisham b. Abī Umayya b. al-Mughīra was killed by Quzmān. Al-Walīd b. al-As b. Hisham was killed by Quzmān. Umayya b. Abī Hudhayfa b. al-Mughīra was killed by Alī b. Abī Tālib. Khalid b. al-A'lam al-'Uqaylī was killed by Quzmān. Yūnus b. Muhammad al-Zafarī related to us from his father, who said: Quzmān approached, attacking the polytheists, and he encountered Khalid b. A'lam. Each one of them was on foot, and they struck each other with their swords. Khalid b. al-Walīd passed by them and he threw his spear at Quzmān. The spear was deflected from him, but Khalid went away, for he thought that he had killed him. While they were in that situation, Amr b. al-As struck him, and pierced him again, but he was not killed. They continued fighting each other until Quzmān killed Khalid b. al-Alam. Quzmān died from his wounds of that time. Uthman b. Abdullah b. al-Mughīra was killed by al-Harith b. al-Simmma."
- Al-Waqidi, Kitab al-Tarikh wa al-Maghazi, 9th Century
"Al-Waqidī related to us saying, 'Ubayd b. Yahya related to me from Mu'adh b. Rifa'a b. Rafi from his father, saying, When it was the day of Badr we surrounded Umayya b. Khalaf who had a position with the Quraysh. I had my spear and he had his spear and we spontaneously went at each other until our spears fell; then we took to the swords and we struck with them until they were broken at the edge. Then I saw a slit in his armor under his armpit, and I pierced my sword in him until I killed him. The sword came out with fat on it."
- Idem, Kitab al-Tarikh wa al-Maghazi, 9th Century
"'Abdullah b. Jubayr shot his arrows until they were used up. Then he thrust with the spear until it broke, then he broke the scabbard of his sword and fought [with his sword] until he was killed, may peace be upon him. Jual b. Surāqa and Abū Burda b. Niyār approached. They had witnessed the death of Abdullah b. Jubayr, and were the last of those who turned from the mountain when they met the enemy. The polytheists were on horseback and our lines had dispersed."
- Idem, Kitab al-Tarikh wa al-Maghazi, 9th Century
"On the 12th of the Seventh Month, at the Hour of the Horse, Nobunaga launched his attack toward the southeast. After some hours of fighting, the enemy was routed. As a man called Hayashi Yashichirō, a native of the village of Asano who was a famous archer, was fleeing from the battlefield with his bow, Hashimoto Ippa, the famous harquebusier, went for him. Since they were long-time friends, Yashichirō shouted to Ippa, I’m not about to spare your life! — Understood, was the response. Yashichirō nocked a shaft fitted with an arrowhead about four sun [twelve centimeters] long to his bow, turned back, and sent the arrow flying deep into Ippa’s armpit. But Ippa, who had loaded his harquebus with a double charge, took aim and fired, too. Yashichirō fell to the ground. Right then, one of Nobunaga’s pages, Sawaki Tōhachi, rushed to the scene with the intention of taking Hayashi’s head. Still lying on the ground, Yashichirō managed to unsheathe his sword and strike Tōhachi at the left elbow, lopping off the forearm along with the gauntlet. But Tōhachi, far from giving up, kept at it and finally took his head. Hayashi Yashichirō was a great swordsman as well as an unparalleled archer."
- Ota Gyuichi, 信長公記, Shinchō kōki, 1598
"When the third day came, the Yacata prepared his people and sent them out to make an impromptu assault on the enemy, first with muskets and arrows, and then immediately dropping the bows and muskets and taking out their catanas. [He also ordered them] to not waste time with taking the heads of those who had been killed (which the Japanese were wont to do) so as not to embarrass themselves by killing fewer of the enemy. And the Yacata exhorted them to comport themselves as good and strong soldiers, who had long been renowned in battle. They assaulted the enemy with such fury and fought so valiantly that they destroyed all the Chinese squadrons and killed more than thirty thousand men. They pursued those who fled and halted their retreat at a river, where many Chinese drowned. They cut a swathe with their catana blades through others who were unable to take shelter. The Japanese were tired of killing and their catanas were blunt and misshapen by cutting. With this victory and great slaughter, the Yacata of Satsuma left fields strewn with dead Chinese. He was highly renowned and received great honor."
- Francisco Rodriguez, Relação do fim e remate que teve a guerra da Corea, 1599
This event occurred during the Imjin War.
"... then after shooting, they [the ashigaru] were to discard [their] yumi and teppou, and draw swords, and furiously cut and charge. The [ashigaru with] teppou stood amongst the archers, and after five arrows were loosed, they were ordered to begin shooting [their] teppou..."
- Pseudo-Kosaka Masanobu, 甲陽軍鑑, Koyo Gunkan, 1616, Translation by Me
Thank you to parallelpain and danzs for helping me!
This is a supposed description of Uedahara; however, even if this did not occur during the battle, I think we can understand it to at least be advice (or a prescription) from the author.
"Those Samurai assigned below Second Spear are known as Yari Waki. [Among this category are designations such as] Yari Shita, or the achievement of being able to lay an opponent flat out with your spear, as well as Kuzushi Giwa, or the achievement of bringing about a rout.
The title of Yari Waki goes to those who fight with spears other than those designated First Spear or Second Spear. Following them, those that attack with Katana or Muskets are known as Katana Yari Waki in addition to Bow and Musket Yari Waki. It goes without saying that the warriors on your side as well as on the enemy side have Yari Waki armed with Katana thus there is the designation of First Yari Waki.
In particular, when in the midst of battle against an intractable enemy [and your side is debating between advancing or retreating] a warrior who strikes in viciously and knocks the enemy down flat is honored with the name Renowned Yari Shita. A warrior who is somewhat late joining the fray but who adds crucial strength to the forces on his side and, when the tide of battle is on the cusp of turning in your favor, strikes an enemy combatant down flat is honored with the name Honored Kuzushi Giwa [the Honor of Being the One Who Led the Breaking Point].
Should a person like this serve under the First Spear or Second Spear one can only wonder at how reliable a warrior he would become. For that reason this top position of Yari Waki is given higher merit than Second Spear. Following that the order of merit goes next to Bow Yari Waki and after that is Musket Yari Waki."
- Hojo Ujinaga, 兵法雄鑑, Heiho Yukan, 1645
"[Instructions for musketeers:]
When you get very close to the enemy, separate into the right and left groups and begin fighting with spears. When you have used up everything in your satchel, draw the cleaning rod from the waist, replace it with the musket and then draw your sword, cutting the enemy by aiming at his hand or leg. If you hit the front of the enemy helmet rashly, a bad sword will bend into a shape like that of the handle of a pot.
[...]
[Instructions for archers:]
Before bow fighting begins, fix a hazuyari blade onto your bow.
[...]
If the time comes you could be killed at any moment, so get close to the enemy, even closer than a spear’s length and shoot the last arrow targeting a gap within the opponent. Then stab with the blade which is fixed to your bow at the enemy’s face or any gap, such as an opening with the tasse — that is the skirt of the armour. After that, draw anything you like, such as your sword or your wakizashi, and try to cut the hand or leg of the enemy. Never try to hit the front of the helmet with your weapon; if it is poor in quality, then it will have the edge nicked and it will not function anymore.
It is tough and painful, but if you hang on to the enemy closely, there is a chance of you stabbing him with the short blade attached to the horn of the bow. All you have to do is cling on to him and stab."
- Anonymous, 雑兵物語, Zohyo Monogatari, Late 17th Century
The hazuyari is a blade that is affixed to the end of the bow. Note that the author still wants the archer to use his sword at some point in the battle.
"In the meantime, the enemy had already captured Kimhae and, dividing their army, had started plundering the villages in Right Kyōngsang province. Kim launched out against the Japanese, but as his troops approached their enemy, his officers and soldiers became scared and tried to run away. Kim dismounted his horse and sat down on a chair, showing no signs of fear. He sent for Yi Chong'in and said to him, Since you are a brave warrior, you should not run away from the enemy. At that moment, one of the enemy soldiers with an iron mask dashed forward to attack, wielding his sword. Yi Chong'in ran his horse to meet his opponent and killed him by shooting an arrow. Watching his man killed, the enemy did not dare advance further and ran away."
- Yu Songyong, 懲毖錄, Jingbirok, 1604
"When we looked across the river, the number of enemy soldiers was also not that great. They arranged their battle formation in a straight line on top of Tongdaewon Hill, and the red and white banners, placed at intervals, looked like those of our funeral procession. About a dozen cavalry soldiers lined up in the front toward Yanggak Island, and the water level came up to the bellies of their horses. They were holding the reins of the horses with their hands. So it looked like they were going to cross the river. Behind these men stood the rest of the troops. A few soldiers among them were seen walking around; on their shoulders they carried long swords which glittered under the sun like the flash of lightning. Someone said, They are not real swords they are just wooden swords coated with white wax, designed to trick us. However, one could not be sure because of the long distance. Six or seven of the enemy took their position at the edge of the river and discharged their muskets toward our fortress. The sound of their muskets was terribly loud and intimidating, and the bullets crossed the river to fall down in the fortress. Some of the longest shots, flying over a distance of more than a thousand paces, fell on the roof tiles of Taedonggwan Hall. Some of them even drove as deep as several inches into the wooden columns of the battlements."
- Idem, 懲毖錄, Jingbirok, 1604
Mirror polished blades were by no means unique to the Japanese. In truth, I doubt they had devised some sort of stratagem like suggest above by one unnamed man; they were probably just naked swords.
"The troops that Provincial Military Commander [Li Rusong] brought with him were mainly the cavalry of the north. Therefore, they had no firearms with them; all they had were little swords with dull blades. The enemy, on the other hand, was made up of infantry soldiers with sharp swords that measured three or four feet long. A fierce battle ensued between the two armies, and the Japanese soon prevailed, wielding their long swords and cutting down men and horses. Watching the situation deteriorate, Provincial Military Commander [Li] sent for the main army that he had left behind; but before they arrived, his troops were defeated and suffered many casualties. The enemy also gathered their forces, and being tired, they did not pursue the Ming army."
- Idem, 懲毖錄, Jingbirok, 1604
"The English have dismounted, aflame with desire to win and achieve honour...
[...]
Now began fierce battle, and the dust commenced to rise. Archers shoot swiftly, thicker than rain falls. Like a valiant man the Duke of Lancaster leads the way; after him goes Thomas d'Ufford and the stalwart Hugh de Hastings, each one with his banner unfurled, each one holding lance couched. On the right hand was Chandos, who acquired great renown that day, and Stephen Cosinton, John Devereux, a noble knight ; and there was the good Guichard d'Angle that ever was in the forefront. With him he had his two sons and other knights of renown, who did their duty stoutly; and there was the right noble lord of Rays. There might one see the companions coming, all close together, banners and pennons. Each one held lance in hand, and they made fierce onslaught to attack their enemies; and the archers kept on shooting, and the crossbow-men on the other side, who were with the Bastard; but all advanced so far on foot that they met together with Bertrand's division, which caused them much mischief. There might you see thrust of lance as they came together; each one strove to acquit himself well. Then, of a surety, was no heart in the world so bold as not to be amazed at the mighty blows they dealt with the great axes they bore, and the swords and daggers. It was no great pastance, for you might see many a good knight fall to the ground."
- Chandos le héraut, "Life of the Black Prince", 1386
"The two sides came together so vigorously that the lances on both sides fell to the ground as men closed on each other, fighting and inflicting wounds on one another with swords, axes, and daggers. Those supporting King Pedro and the Prince of Wales shouted as their war cry Guienne and St. George while Don Enrique’s men countered with Castile and Santiago. And those of the prince’s vanguard fell back a few feet in such a way that Don Enrique’s vanguard, sensing victory, pushed more strongly than ever against the others and began again to strike."
- Pedro López de Ayala, Crónica del Rey Don Pedro Primero, ~1400
"A desperate fight ensued. Felled by a powerful blow to the helmet from Akugenda's sword, Shindōzaemon was struggling to rise again, his sword still in his hand, when Kamada came down on him, pinned him to the ground, and took his head. Shigemori fled far away, while the fight cost his two men their lives."
- Anonymous, 平治物語, Heiji monogatari, 13th Century
Striking the helmet with the sword is quite common in the literature. While it is unlikely to kill (unlike a mace-blow with a horse aiding its force, or a strike from a pollaxe), it may "stun" and allow a finishing blow, provided it is done with a strong arm and good form (or a strong horse), without which, it may do very little. Such committed actions have inherent risk as well.*
"The man’s fast horse got so far ahead that Hirayama fitted a small humming arrow to the string and let fly. It planted itself in the fleeing mount’s flank. The rider dismounted in haste from his frantically rearing horse and fled into a roadside chapel. Hirayama, too, dismounted, calmly tethered his horse to a gate post, drew his sword, and stole into the chapel. His foe’s sword must have snapped, because the man put an arrow to the string, darted behind a pile of lumber in the chapel yard, and waited with his bow partially drawn. The arrow flew when Hirayama came straight after him. Because he was moving forward, the shaft aimed to strike inside his helmet hit instead the outside of his neckplate. The man dropped his bow, drew his dagger, and stood his ground. When Hirayama’s sword struck off his forearm, he rushed Hirayama to grapple with him. Hirayama dropped his sword, seized the man, cut off his head, placed the head on the lumber, and paused, breathing heavily."
- Idem, 平治物語, Heiji monogatari, 13th Century
"Jōmyō Meishū of Tsutsui, one of the worker-monks, was attired in a dark blue hitatare, a suit of black-laced armor, and a five-plate helmet. At his waist, he wore a sword with a black lacquered hilt and scabbard; on his back, there rode a quiver containing twenty-four arrows fledged with black eagle-wing feathers. Grasping a lacquered, rattan-wrapped bow and his favorite long, plain-handled naginata, he advanced onto the bridge and announced his name in a mighty voice.
You must have heard of me long ago. See me now with your own eyes! Everyone at Miidera knows me! I am the worker-monk Jōmyō Meishū from Tsutsui, a warrior worth a thousand men. If any here consider themselves my equals, let them come forward. I'll meet them! He let fly a fast and furious barrage from his twenty-four-arrow quiver, which killed twelve men instantly and wounded eleven others. Then, with one arrow left, he sent the bow clattering away, untied and discarded the quiver, cast off his fur boots, and ran nimbly along a bridge beam in his bare feet. Others had feared to attempt the crossing: Jōmyō acted as though it were Ichijō or Nijō Avenue. He mowed down five enemies with his naginata and was engaging a sixth when the blade snapped in the middle. He abandoned the weapon and fought with his sword. Hard-pressed by the enemy host, he slashed in every direction, using the zigzag, interlacing, crosswise, dragonfly reverse, and water-wheel maneuvers. After cutting down eight men on the spot, he struck the helmet top of a ninth so hard that the blade snapped at the hilt rivet, slipped loose, and splashed into the river. Then he fought on desperately with a dirk as his sole resource.
Among the monks, there was a certain Ichirai, a man of great strength and agility, who served the Holy Teacher Keishū at the Jōenbō. Having followed Jōmyō and fought in his wake, this Ichirai now wished to pass him, but found the beam too narrow. Your pardon, Jōmyō, he said. He put his hand on the flap of Jōmyō's helmet, made a brisk leap over his shoulder, and went on fighting.
Ichirai died in battle. Jōmyō crawled back, removed his armor and helmet on the grass in front of the Byōdōin, and counted sixty-three arrow dents in the armor. Five shafts had penetrated the leather, but none of the wounds was serious. He treated the places with moxa, wrapped his head in a cloth, donned a white clerical robe, broke his bow to make a staff, shod his feet in low clogs, and set off toward Nara, chanting the name of Amida Buddha."
- Anonymous, 平家物語, Heike Monogatari, Early 14th Century
"The two charged into the thick of the mass. Kakiya with his five-foot, three-inch long sword [odachi] and Namera with his five-foot, two-inch glaive slew six. Look! Ujikiyo cried when he saw them. A mere two of the enemy have killed many of our men. You should be ashamed of yourselves! Level your blades, charge them, engage with them, kill them! Yamaguchi Danjō, Fukutomi Bitchū and other mighty warriors, fourteen or fifteen of them, promptly dismounted, ranged their spear and glaive points in a serried row, and attacked.
There’s no escape, Namera. Kakiya said. Dismount! We’re going to die. Armed as he was with a long sword, Kakiya moved to slash vertically at men and horses, meanwhile avoiding the foe’s daggers; but his blade, entangled in cut strips of armor sleeves, stabbed deep into the soil. He was striving to extract it when, in the struggle, a lance and a glaive penetrated his armor. He certainly knew he was finished. You there, Namera? he shouted. I’ll go on ahead! He called the Amida’s Name four or five times, and a blade thrust killed him.
Namera heard him. Right! he replied. In battle frenzy he charged into the enemy and fought to the death. That must be Namera Hyōgo, Ujikiyo said to himself, famed throughout the nine provinces of Tsukushi. And he continued aloud, Get him, men! Use your long weapons [nagagusoku]! Move your sword-bearer around behind him and cut his armor skirts!
Five men, already in place with thrusting spears and glaives, sent their swordbearers dashing around behind Namera. These cut the back plate [okubyō-gane] of the shin guard on each leg. Badly wounded, Namera collapsed to a sitting position, braced upright by his arms. When a new thrust slipped past his skirts, he dropped his glaive, drew a three-foot sword, and with it kept the attackers at bay.
He then looked up at them. I am exhausted, he said. Please just let me lie down. Gentlemen, see me welcomed by Amida and go to rebirth in his Pure Land. He faced west and died seated, braced by his arms. Every witness, friend or foe, was deeply moved."
- Anonymous, 明徳記, Meitokuki, Late 14th Century
"The Romans on seeing them advancing from their tents did not remain quiet, but rushing forward, gave them no chance to form strictly in line, and by attacking with a charge and shout prevented them from hurling their javelins, in which they had especial confidence; in fact, they came to so close quarters with them that the enemy could not employ either their pikes or long swords. So the barbarians pushed and shoved, fighting more with their bodies than with their weapons, and struggled to overturn whomever they encountered and to knock down whoever withstood them. Many, deprived even of the use of their short swords, fought with hands and teeth instead, dragging down their opponents, and biting and tearing them, since they had a great advantage in the size of their bodies. The Romans, however, did not suffer any great injuries in consequence of this; they closed with their foes, and thanks to their armour and skill, somehow proved a match for them. At length, after carrying on that sort of battle for a very long time, they prevailed late in the day. For their daggers, which were smaller than the Gallic daggers and had steel points, proved most serviceable to them; moreover, the men themselves, accustomed to hold out for a long time with the same sustained effort lasted better than the barbarians, because the endurance of the latter was not of like quality with the vehemence of their attacks."
- Cassius Dio Cocceianus, Ῥωμαϊκὴ Ἱστορία, Romaïkí Istoría, 233
A rare (possible) reference to Romans using daggers. The word translated to "daggers" was ξιφίδια, the diminutive of ξίφος, but Dio uses βραχυτέρων ξιφῶν to refer to "shorter swords". Thus, in my opinion, it is referring to the ever present (yet invisible) pugiones.*
"Not many bows will be stretched nor will there be numerous slings, whenever Ares brings together the press of battle on the plain; it will be the woeful work of swords. This is the warfare in which those spear-famed lords of Euboea are skilled."
- Archilochus, 7th Century
Whether or not the spears of those "spear-famed" men were thrown, at the very least it shows that the use of dart or spear did not preclude the use of the sword.*
"But Narses had anticipated the Goths by choosing fifty infantrymen from a cohort and sending them late at night to occupy and hold the hill. And they, finding none of the enemy in the way, went there and remained quiet. Now there is a certain water-course in front of the hill, running along the path which I have just mentioned and opposite the spot where the Goths had made their camp, and it was at this point that the fifty took up their position, standing shoulder to shoulder and arrayed in the form of a phalanx as well as the limited space permitted.
After day came, Totila saw what had happened and was eager to dislodge them. So he immediately sent a troop of horsemen against them with orders to drive them out from there as quickly as possible. The horsemen accordingly charged upon them with great hubbub and shouting, intending to capture them at the first cry, but the Romans drew up together into a small space and, making a barrier with their shields and thrusting forward their spears, held their ground. Then the Goths came on, charging in haste and thus getting themselves into disorder, while the fifty, pushing with their shields and thrusting very rapidly with their spears, which were nowhere allowed to interfere one with the other, defended themselves most vigorously against their assailants; and they purposely made a din with their shields, terrifying the horses, on the one hand, by this means, and the men, on the other, with the points of their spears. And the horses became excited, because they were greatly troubled both by the rough ground and by the din of the shields, and also because they could not get through anywhere, while the men at the same time were gradually worn out, fighting as they were with men packed so closely together and not giving an inch of ground, and trying to manage horses that did not in the least obey their urging. So they were repulsed in the first attack and rode back. And a second time they made the attempt and retired with the same experience. Then, after faring thus many times, they no longer continued the attack, but Totila substituted another troop for this work. And when they fared as their predecessors had, still others undertook the task. So after Totila had in this way sent in many troops and had accomplished nothing with all of them, he finally gave up.
Thus the fifty won great renown for valour, but two of them distinguished themselves particularly in this action, Paulus and Ansilas, who had leaped out from the phalanx and made a display of valour surpassing all others. For they drew their swords and laid them on the ground, and then stretched their bows and kept shooting with a most telling aim at the enemy. And they destroyed many men and many horses as well, as long as their quivers still held arrows. At length, when their missiles had now entirely failed them, seizing their swords and holding their shields before them, all by themselves they warded off the assailants. And whenever any of their opponents on horseback came at them with their spears, they immediately broke off the heads of the spears with a blow of their swords. But after they had in this manner checked the onrushes of the enemy many times, it came about that the sword of one of them (this was Paulus) was bent double by the frequent cutting of the wooden shafts and so was utterly useless. This then he immediately threw on the ground, and seizing the spears with both hands he would wrench them from his assailants. And by wrenching four spears from the enemy in this way in the sight of all he made himself the chief cause of their abandoning their attempt. Wherefore, in consequence of the exploit, Narses made him a personal guard of his own from that time on."
- Procopius, Ὑπὲρ τῶν Πολέμων Λόγοι, "History of the Wars", ~550
"Soon our infantry too was left unsupported. The companies and regiments were shoved together so closely that a soldier could scarcely draw his sword, or even withdraw his hand after he had once stretched it out.
By this time such great clouds of dust arose that it was hardly possible to see the sky. The air resounded with terrible cries. The darts, which brought death on every side, reached their mark and fell with deadly effect, for no one could see them quickly enough to place himself on guard. The barbarians, rushing on with their enormous army, beat down our horses and men and gave us no open spaces where we could fall back to operate. They were so closely packed that it became impossible for us to escape by forcing a path through them. Our men finally began to despise the thought of death and, again taking their swords, slew all they encountered. Helmets and loricae were smashed in pieces by mutual blows of axes.
In this great tumult and confusion the infantry, exhausted by their efforts and the danger, when in turn strength and mind for planning anything were lacking, their lances for the most part broken by constant clashing, content to fight with drawn swords, plunged into the dense masses of the foe, regardless of their lives, seeing all around that every loophole of escape was lost."
- Ammianus Marcellinus, Rerum gestarum, Late 4th Century
"When be learned of this, the Emperor was angered and, together with his lieutenants, he speedily made his way through the French King's ranks to the place where the fight for the river was going on. They dismounted from their horses and became infantrymen — as the Germans are accustomed to do in the crisis of battle. With shields in hand they fought the enemy hand-to-hand with swords. The enemy, who had earlier resisted valiantly, were unable to withstand the attack. They relinquished the river bank and fled at full speed to the city."
- Willelmus Tyrensis, Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum, 1184
William of Tyre uses the sword as the "default" weapon of war in his writing, so this quote is very circumstantial. However, he mentions them carrying shields, and their custom of dismounting, so he is describing them to some degree.
"The German people were accompanied by numerous allies, and trusted (wrongly) in the help of the cowardly Lombards, believing that the Normans would either turn tail or perish at the first onslaught. But victory in battle rests not on numbers, horses, people or arms, but on whom it is conferred by Heaven. There was a small hill between the Germans and the Norman squadrons. All sorts of people had come to help the former, from Apulia, Valva, Campania, Marsia and Chieti. However the German leaders, Werner and Albert, had only brought seven hundred Swabians. There were proud people of great courage, but not versed in horsemanship, who fought rather with the sword than with the lance. Since they could not control the movements of their horses with their hands they were unable to inflict serious injuries with the lance; however they excelled with the sword. These swords were very long and keen, and they were often capable of cutting someone vertically in two! They preferred to dismount and take guard on foot, and they chose rather to die than to turn tail. Such was their bravery that they were far more formidable like this than when riding on horseback."
- Guillelmus Apuliensis, Gesta Roberti Wiscardi, ~1099
"As has been stated, the Germans had been many times repulsed by the Persians and had lost many of their men. Since they had given up their intention of passing through Philomelion by this time, they hurried back to reach Nicaea where they joined the French who were marching on the road and the other kings who were also leading large armies. One of the latter was the ruler of the Czech people, who appears to have been appointed king by Conrad; another was the ruler of the Poles who are Scythians by race and dwell near the western Huns.
When the troops merged, the French said before the eyes of all something which sounded like this Pouge, Alamane! [Fr, Bougez, allemand; Move over, German!], a cliché phrase which the French had for years been accustomed to apply to the Germans. I will now, therefore, explain whence this phrase derives. These two peoples do not conduct battle in the same way. For the French are particularly skilful in riding their horses in good order and in charging with lances, while their horses overtake the German ones in terms of speed. The Germans, however, are more capable than the French when it comes to conducting battle on foot and greatly excel in the use of the sword. Thus, whenever the Germans march against the French, they determine to conduct battle as infantry because they distrust their cavalry. Consequently, the French engage the disorderly German cavalry and prevail over it. Then they overrun the more steadfast Germans with their horses. Even though they are considerably less numerous than the latter, they turn them to flight, since the Germans are infantry, and customarily mock them with the aforementioned phrase because even though it is possible to fight on horseback, they prefer to fight on foot. As I have said, this mockery was now repeatedly inflicted on the Germans by the French, vexing them greatly."
- Joannes Kinnamos, "Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus", ~1180
Thank you to the commenter who reminded me of these last two!
General Quotes
"Know that there is no weapon among weapons that is described with [such] nobility, and that is so valuable that its possessor is proud of it and that achieves victory with it, except the sword, because it has respect and superiority over all the weapons. [They] also beat the armies with its name. They say: We conquered it by sword. This is such a weapon that all the people use it; the one who knows [how to wield it] and the one who does not, young and old are protected by it everywhere. And it is [such] a good brother that it does not become inactive in wide or even in narrow places. One needs it on the sea and on the land and in a crowd. On a very windy day the lance becomes a burden for its possessor, but this never becomes useless. And on that day the archer can not shoot his arrow straight, no one can do without the sword. No matter how many weapons are at your disposal, you are certain to say: Among every class of people and in every land there is no weapon other than the sword with which they [can always] fight and that weapon is identified with them. Although they have many weapons, they would never be able to do without the sword, but those who have a sword can do without all the other weapons."
- Anonymous, Munyatu'l-ghuzat, Wish of the Warriors of the Faith, 14th Century
"The sword dispenses with other weapons, but almost no others can replace it. Does it not always accompany the employment of all others? So says Yami al-Muharibi: When a sword strikes with a sword, there is no other option."
- Ibn Hudayl
"Whatever I say of the sword, in sum: it is the Sultan of weapons. Whatever is said about other weapons, like the spear, is vain boasting. For the roses of the sword are the shield of Heaven’s Garden. The sword’s hyacinths descend from Paradise’s lilies."
- Nasuh ibn Karagoz, Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt, Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors, 1533
"And 'tis most certain, that in Combat, as well as Pursuit, the Sword does most Execution; and no Armor is less than Sword proof: I therefore earnestly wish, that the Officers, the Troopers, and the Pikemen, were bound under severe Penalties, to fight in Armor, and constantly to march in Armor..."
- Roger Boyle, A treatise of the art of war, 1677
It is in spite of armor being "sword-proof" that the sword still, in Boyle's opinion, does the "most Execution"; in fact, it is because Roger Boyle believed that the sword does so much in battle that he wanted soldiers to wear armor.
"Everyone holds that the sword is the queen of weapons, because all the others have some exception [in their use], and that the sword is worn everywhere and in all companies. So that in the army the soldier puts down all kind of weapons except for the sword. This is a great ignorance of all those who show to handle several kinds of weapons, and do not show the single sword only because he can barely teach the handling of several kinds of weapons, if they ignore the handling of the principal; one must therefore exercise it from the beginning otherwise it is beating the head against the wall, as the saying goes."
- Andre des Bordes, Discours de la théorie de la pratique et de l'excellence des armes, 1610
"An impression prevails among civilians, and to a limited extent among military men, who are not well informed, that the musket and bayonet has the advantage over the sword in single combat. This impression is entirely erroneous, and is unsustained by any well-defined scientific principle or any practical test that can entitle it to a moment’s consideration. On the contrary, there are thousands of well-authenticated cases on record where men who were not expert swordsmen have defeated men of equal or superior strength, armed with muskets and bayonets. The lance may be considered a formidable weapon under certain circumstances; but in a mêlée or a hand-to-hand fight, when opposed to the sword, it is utterly worthless. The same may be said of the bayonet."
- Matthew J. O'Rourke, A New System of Sword Exercise, 1872
This is just his opinion, and in his period not all shared it (but others did, such as Louis E. Nolan, among others).
"At the same time, it is to the first kind of cavalry, or cuirassiers, that the second, or lancers, must look for support, when brought into disorder; and what disorder can be greater than that of routed lancers? Formidable as lancers undoubtedly are against infantry, they are unable to contend with cuirassiers; and the question then naturally suggests itself, whether a body of cuirassiers armed with lances, would not have a decided advantage over another armed only with cut-and-thrust swords? We reply, certainly not; for since their rapidity and strength are supposed to be in equal proportions, it may reasonably be inferred, that the long sword in the powerful hand of the cuirassier, protected as he is by the breast-plate, is much more likely to parry off the thrust of his antagonist's lance, than is the latter to put him effectually hors de combat; —add to this, the very defenceless state in which the lancer finds himself when his thrust has failed; for then, holding his bridle with his left hand, and a weapon rendered useless in his his right, he is completely at the mercy of his opponent. Besides, the lance, to be wielded with dexterity, requires as much suppleness and agility in the body as in the arm; and how can this be reasonably expected, as regards the former, when its energies are confined by the inflexible cuirass? The crouching attitude which the exercise of this weapon requires, would be utterly impossible."
- The United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine, 1829
"Formerly it was a received opinion that the lance was particularly formidable in single encounters, that the lancer should be a light, active horseman, and that space was required whereon he might manage his horse and turn him always towards the object at which he was to thrust. But of late there seems to be rather a disposition to take up Marshal Marmont's notion of arming heavy cavalry with lances, to break infantry as well as cavalry. All seem to forget that a lance is useless in a mêlée, —that the moment the lancer pulls up and the impulsive power is stopped, that instant the power of the weapon is gone.
[...]
Let us allow, for the sake of argument, that a lance of a proper length, handy, well poised, and held at its centre, reaches further beyond the horse's head than the point of a sword held at arm's length: in what way can this conduce to success, when it is universally acknowledged that it is the superior impetus and speed of one of the advancing lines which overthrows the other; the weapons only coming into play afterwards?
[...]
If lances be such good weapons, surely those who wield them ought to acquire great confidence in them, whereas it is well known that, in battle, lancers generally throw them away, and take to their swords. I never spoke with an English lancer who had been engaged in the late Sikh wars that did not declare the lance to be a useless tool, and a great incumbrance in close conflict.
[...]
The French lancers in attacking lancers of other nations often slung their lances, and drew their swords. General de Brack recommends swordsmen, engaged with lancers, to close upon them, and crowd them together. He says, "The lancers jammed together, can neither point nor parry, and one of two things must happen; they will either throw down their lances, in order to get at their swords, or they will retain their lances, and in this case you will have the best of the bargain. Our pivot files in the lancers of the Imperial guard did not carry lances. I remember upon two occasions in 1814 (at Hoagstraten, near Breda, and at Pont-à-Trecir, below Lisle) having to deal with Russian and Prussian lancers, who, like ourselves, held their own upon narrow roads with deep ditches on either hand. I placed carabineers at the head of my column, and made my lancers follow ; and these last put their lances in the bucket, and drew their swords ; and, having penetrated the enemy, our success so far surpassed our hopes, that we cut them down without damage to ourselves.""
- Louis E. Nolan, Cavalry, 1853
"A trooper of the Hussars, named Hayes, attacked a spearman, who parried his sword thrusts with one of the hippopotamus-hide shields carried by most of the enemy. The trooper tried in vain to cut the man down, but his horse was too restive to render this practicable. Hayes then coolly dismounted, and after parrying a spear thrust, killed his opponent with a sword cut."
- Charles Royle, The Egyptian Campaigns, 1900
"As my horse leapt into the deep depression my lance entered the left eye of a white robed figure who had raised his double-edged sword to strike. The enormous impact and the weight of the man's body shattered the lance and I cast the broken pieces from me. I quickly drew my sword just in time as another man pointed his flintlock, I struck him down and blood splattered his white robe. Then it was parry and thrust as I spurred my horse on through the melee. Luck was with us, the horse bravely scrambled up the opposite bank of the stream bed and we were through without a scratch."
- Wade Rix, letter, 19th Century
"The enemy began forming their line of battle about nine in the morning of the 18th; we did not commence till ten. I think it was about eleven when we were ready to receive them. They began upon our right with the most tremendous firing that ever was heard, and I can assure you, they got it as hot as they gave it; then it came down to the left, where they were received by our brave Highlanders. No men could ever behave better: our brigade of cavalry covered them. Owing to a column of foreign troops giving way, our brigade was forced to advance to the support of our brave fellows, and which we certainly did in style; we charged through two of their columns, each about 5000; it was in the first charge I took the eagle from the enemy: he and I had a hard contest for it; he thrust for my groin — I parried it off, and cut him through the head; after which I was attacked by one of their Lancers, who threw his lance at me, but missed the mark, by my throwing it off with my sword by my right side: then I cut him from the chin upwards, which went through his teeth; next I was attacked by a foot soldier, who, after firing at me, charged me with his bayonet — but he very soon lost the combat, for I parried it, and cut him down through the head; so that finished the contest for the eagle. After which I presumed to follow my comrades, eagle and all, but was stopped by the General saying to me, You brave fellow, take that to the rear you have done enough until you get quit of it; which I was obliged to do, but with great reluctance. I retired to a height, and stood there for upwards of an hour, which gave a general view of the field; but I cannot express the horrors I beheld: the bodies of my brave comrades were lying so thick upon the field, that it was scarcely possible to pass, and horses innumerable. I took the eagle into Brussels, amidst the acclamations of thousands of the spectators who saw it."
- Charles Ewart, letter qtd. by George Jones, The Battle of Waterloo, 1852
"First, a little about that fatal 25th October charge. When we received the order, not a man could seem to believe it. However, on we went, and during that ride what each man felt no one can tell. I cannot tell you my own thoughts. Not a word or a whisper. On on we went! Oh! If you could have seen the faces of that doomed 800 men at that moment; every man's features fixed, his teeth clenched, and as rigid as death, still it was on on! At about 300 yards I got my hit, but it did not floor me. Clash! And oh God! what a scene! I will not attempt to tell you, as I know it is not to your taste, what we did; but we were Englishmen, and that is enough. I believe I was as strong as six men at least I felt so; for I know I had chopped two Russian lances in two as if they had been reeds. Well, I got out of the melée, but, in returning, my poor horse was shot down, and me under him. Poor beast! I believe he struggled to release me. You will hardly think I took time to give the noble brute a last look, but I did though; he was a fine creature."
- Thomas Dudley, letter, 1854
"Of course with our handful it was life or death; so we rushed at them to break through them; but as soon as we got through one body there was another to engage. At any rate, with five or six of our fellows at my rear, I galloped on, parrying with the determination of one who would not lose his life, breaking the lances of the cowards who attacked us in the proportion of three or four to one, occasionally catching one a slap with the sword across the teeth, and giving another the point in his arm or breast. They still pressed on me till I got sight of our Heavies, when, thanks be to God, they stopped pursing me."
- William Pennington, letter, 1854
According to his father, his only training in life (horsemanship and otherwise) was the 6 weeks they gave him when he signed up!
"A few gunners stood in a group with their rifles, and we cut at them as we went rushing by. Beyond the guns the Russian cavalry, who should have come out to prevent our getting near the gunners, were coming down upon us howling wildly, and we went at them with a rush. I selected a mounted Cossack, who was making for me with his lance pointed at my breast. I knocked it upwards, pulled up quickly, and cut him down across the face. I tried to get hold of his lance, but he dropped it."
- Joseph Grigg, The Charge of the Six Hundred, 1897
"By this time I could not see three men of our regiment. I of course thought I was lost but I turned my Mare's Head to try to get back if I could. I had only gone a few yards when I saw two Russian lancers coming towards me with clenched teeth and staring like savages. I prepared to meet them with as much coolness and determination as I could command. The first one made a thrust at me with his Lance. It is a heavy weapon and easily struck down which I did with my sword thrusting it at the same time through the fellow’s neck. He fell from his horse with a groan. The shock nearly brought me from my saddle. The other fellow wheeled round his dying comrade and made a thrust at me. I had not the strength to strike down the blow for my sword fell from my grasp, but my time was not yet come. One of our Lancers seeing the attack made on me came to my assistance and thrust his Lance clean through the fellow’s body at the moment I lost my sword."
- John Firkins, 19th Century
"The Lance. This is a most efficient weapon when used by a thoroughly-trained man, but in the hands of raw levies it is perfectly worthless. In carefully-disciplined cavalry of the line, intended for charging alone, the lance has a terrible moral effect upon the enemy, and without doubt is a most deadly weapon in the shock of closing squadrons, or the shock of cavalry against squares. When the fight, however, degenerates into the mêlée, then the lance is awkward and cumbersome."
- George Taylor Denison, Modern Cavalry, 1868
Denison here advocated for the use of the revolver in the melee instead of the sword (although he still wished to retain the sword), reasons which not all cavalrymen at time agreed with (I will point out he had based a large part of his reasoning on actions in the American Civil War, in which the Americans were not great swordsmen, nor were their swords great swords either); however, seeing as the revolver was only "perfected" a little prior to his writing, the sword (and other sidearms) would have been (and was) the weapon of the choice in the melee before such, so I see it fit to include it here.**
"There are various opinions as to the efficiency of the lance as an arm for cavalry. There can be no doubt that, single-handed, a good lancer is superior to any swordsman, and that no weapon creates so great a moral effect in a charge; but in a mêlée, the lance is comparatively useless, and it strikes me, that the rear rank of a lancer regiment, should always charge with lances slung on the left arm, and swords drawn. My opinion is, that lancers should be powerful men, picked for good horsemanship from the whole army, and only used on emergencies."
- Valentine Baker, The British Cavalry, 1858
So he says that "There can be no doubt that, single-handed, a good lancer is superior to any swordsman," but even amongst staunch advocates for the lance, such a thing was contentious. Some believed the sword to be the superior weapon for the duel on horseback, while others, like Captain Baker here, thought otherwise. In truth, I suppose both opinions, while almost contradictory, to be valid thoughts.**
"At present the whole of the German cavalry is armed with the lance, and in France the front ranks of the dragoon regiments attached to the cavalry divisions have recently been again armed with the lance. The German military authorities attach great importance to the moral, as well as material, advantages conferred by the lance, while General Ssuchotin, of the Russian army, holds opposite views. It is not the weapon, however, that will ensure success: this depends on other factors, but there is no doubt that the lance confers great advantages, though in a mêlée the lance may become an encumbrance and less useful than the sword. For this reason, and with a view to dismounted action [with carbines], only the front rank is armed with the lance in the Cossack regiments and the French dragoons, and the two men of a file should act together in the mêlée. As soon as the mêlée opens out [assuming the lancers have not put down their spears], however, into a series of single combats, as well as in the case of pursuit, the superiority of the lance again becomes apparent. Even when being pursued a man can defend himself better with the lance than with the sword.
[...]
Dragomiroff says, 'Military history shows that, both in the conflict between solid lines of cavalry and in single combat, the short cutting weapon always has the advantage, that is to say, assuming it is really a mêlée.' Colonel Water von Walthofen (Kavallerie im Zukunftskriege) expresses a similar opinion: 'The lance has come into favour for totally different reasons, viz., from a desire for self-preservation; the idea being to prevent one's antagonist closing with one, not to come to close quarters with him.'"
- William Balck, Modern European Tactics, Volume 1, 1899
William Balck was in great favor of the lance, although much of his thoughts are too long to put here.
"A rider well trained in sabre and having confidence in his weapon, gifted with composure can combat a lancer with advantage.
The lancer is, without doubt, favoured by the length of his weapon.
But it is a game with little variation; he only has a thrust to give and, if he misses, he has little chance of defending himself from blows with the shaft of the lance. When the rider armed with a sabre makes contact with a lance he has the advantage of the situation. He will find himself to the side of the length of the weapon and out of his reach, while he himself, as the distance closes, with his relatively short weapon, finds himself in range to deliver either a thrust or a cut."
- A. Allessandri & E. André, L’escrime du sabre à cheval, 1899
There is, perhaps, a greater danger in the use of the lance from the lesser skilled and the unarmored in the charge, where an quick riposte to the limb or head can prove fatal if they fail to spit their opponent. However, not all authors believed such a thing to outweigh the benefit of being powerful at the immediate clash, and not to mention its (relative) advantage in the common loose skirmishes, where a swordsman will have to work harder to even reach his opponent (as opposed to the charge, where by the nature of the fight, they will be brought right next to each other).*
"The meadow being large enough to hold two regiments in line, the 23rd and 24th formed the first line, General Corbineau's brigade, consisting of three regiments, forming the second, and the cuirassiers following as reserve. The 24th, which was on the left, had in front of it a regiment of Russian dragoons; my regiment was facing Cossacks of the guard, known by their red coats and the beauty of their horses. These, though they had arrived only a few hours before, seemed in no way fatigued. We advanced at a gallop, and as soon as we were within striking distance General Castex gave the word to charge. His brigade fell upon the Russians, and at the first shock the 24th broke the dragoons opposed to them. My regiment met with more resistance from the Cossacks, picked men of large stature, and armed with lances fourteen feet long, which they held very straight. I had some men killed, a good many wounded; but when, at length, my troopers had pierced the bristling line of steel, all the advantage was on our side. In a cavalry fight the length of lances is a drawback when their bearers have lost their order and are pressed closely by adversaries armed with swords which they can handle easily, while the lancers find it difficult to present the point of their poles. So the Cossacks were constrained to show their backs, and then my troopers did great execution and took many excellent horses."
- Baron de Marbot, Mémoires, 19th Century
Here, Marcelin de Marbot notes that at the onset, the lancers of the opposing Cossacks did a great execution; but his horsemen, armed with the sword, took the advantage in spite of this, owing, in his belief, to the length of the lances inhibiting them. However, later on, he chose to arm his squadrons with the lance, for he apparently liked that arm much.
Of course, if the combat is finished at the onset or soon after, whether due to the lancers being more skillful and piercing many of their opponents or their enemies are less determined and thus turn away to avoid the thrust (or both), the which has sometimes occurred, the "disadvantage" of reach does not necessarily materialize, or if it does in some pockets of fighting, it does not inherently (but it can!) outweigh the "advantage" of reach which caused the early successes. However, there are plenty examples of the opposite, and plenty of examples of men being thrown pell mell amongst one another, causing the lancers to fall to their swords. I only bring this up to show that the lancers (just as the swordsmen) were not fools, the nuance of which is always hard to maintain in matters like these. To be short, war (and the combat therein) is fickle.**
Note: I have largely (although perhaps not entirely) omitted vague accounts where the authors wrote, "and they fought with lances, swords, etc.". If I included such, then naturally the number of accounts of sword-usage posted here would be in the hundreds if not thousands by now, as most accounts of hand-to-hand combat are incredibly vague, and have such words almost verbatim, even from those who were there (and by all means, it is the default description of combat). With the evidence above, I do think that we can take such accounts at face value most of the time (with exceptions, of course), at the very least, that the weapons specified by the writer were being used in that encounter.
As of writing this, this post is very unfinished. However, the core is good enough on its own and expresses my opinions on the matter well enough. There will be lots of things added and finished, and perhaps more things fleshed out. Even this unfinished mess took me forever, so I hope I convinced you on this matter!
- William
Updated 11.22.24 - Added quotes by Pietro Monte, Anna Komnene, Cosmas Decanus, Willelmi Malmesbiriensis, Charles Royle, Witichindi Saxo, Plutarch, Fernão Lopes, Johannes Cuvelier, Jaume I, Francisco Rodriguez, Andre des Bordes, Matthew J. O'Rourke.
Updated 11.24.24 - Finished with dates, titles, and authors. Removed WIP status.
Updated 11.27.24 - Added quotes by Louis E. Nolan, A. Allessandri & E. André.
Updated 11.28.24 - Added quotes by Plutarch, Diodorus, Polybius, Appianos Alexandreus.
Updated 1.24.25 - Added additional thoughts, marked with *. Added quotes by Chandos le héraut, Pedro López de Ayala, Cassius Dio Cocceianus, Archilochus and from the Heiji monogatari.
Updated 1.27.25 - Added additional thoughts, marked with **. Added quotes by George Taylor Denison, Valentine Baker, Baron de Marbot.
Updated 1.29.25 - Added quotes by William Balck and from the United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine.
Updated 2.4.25 - Added quotes by Guillelmi Britonis Armorici, Alessandro Benedetti.
Updated 2.17.25 - Added quotes by Jean de Joinville, Jean Froissart, Jean de Wauvrin, Ibn Hudayl and from the Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal.
Updated 2.18.25 - Added quotes by Nikephoros II Phokas, Nikephoros Ouranos, Maurice, Fulcherus Carnotensis.
Updated 2.23.25 - Added quotes by Dudone Sancti Quintini, Procopius, Jaume I, Wace and from the Chronica de gestis consulum Andegavorum.
Updated 2.24.25 - Added quotes by Johannes Longinus, Ammianus Marcellinus, Niketas Choniates, Imagawa Ryoshun and from the Meitokuki.
Updated 2.25.25 - Added quotes by Johannes Longinus, Richarde Faques, Thomas Ruthall, Polydori Vergilii, Blaize de Montluc, John Barbour and from the La Rotta de Scocesi.
Updated 2.26.25 - Added quotes by Gutierre Díaz de Gámez, Philippe de Commynes, Titus Livius, Václav Vlček, Pietro Monte, Plutarch, Charles Ewart, John Firkins, Joseph Grigg, Thomas Dudley, William Pennington, Wade Rix.
Updated 2.27.25 - Added quotes by Geoffrey le Baker and from the Gesta Henrici Quinti.
Updated 2.28.25 - Added quotes by Willelmus Tyrensis, Guillelmus Apuliensis, Joannes Kinnamos.
Updated 3.1.25 - Added quotes by Anna Komnene, Galterius Cancellarius, Geoffrey le Baker.
Updated 3.2.25 - Added quotes by Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius Rufus, Procopius, Ali ibn al-Athir.
Updated 3.3.25 - Added quotes by Willelmus Tyrensis, Hojo Ujinaga, Yu Songyong, Kosaka Masanobu, and from the Zohyo Monogatari.
Updated 3.4.25 - Added quotes by John Smythe, Master Roger and from the Taiheiki, Cronice et gesta ducum sive principum Polonorum.
Updated 3.5.25 - Added quote from the Heike Monogatari.
Updated 3.7.25 - Added quotes by Snorri Sturluson, Eoin M'Tavis, Jaume I and from the Continuatio hystorie tractate de gestis uirorum illustrium.
Updated 3.8.25 - Added quotes by Robert Barret, Roger Boyle.
Updated 3.9.25 - Added quotes by Edward Hall, Richard Grafton, Ibn Taghribirdi, Al-Waqidi.
Updated 3.11.25 - Added quote by Galbertus notarius Brugensis.
