Comments on: Horses vs Tanks: the Polish myth gone wild

By: Szabcsi

Szabcsi — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 13:40:07 +0000

Yes and that is the difference between a saber and a sword of any kind. A classic saber was meant sole to cut a not deep but long and ugly wound. Not to thrust by any means.
In Hungarian we call those heavy sword which you mentioned also pallos. Thanks for your explain, by the way are you Polish?

By: Szabcsi

Szabcsi — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 13:35:01 +0000

Without any intention to be annoying, please let me tell the one and only difference between the curved swords (convex or concave) and the real saber (the Hungarian word for it is szablya, speek out like sabya). The handle and the blade of a saber is never in a right line; there is an obtuse angle of approx. 75 degrees between them. Because of this angle it could be handled very quickly; you have to use just your wrist not whole your arm to cut. The saber is besides just a very precise cut weapon and you can not thrust with a saber. It is unnecessary to thrust or cut with much force, because – again – you have to handle a saber lightly and fast not slowly and forcefully. The aim to cut of the fingers, cut through the arteries or cause a not deep but very bleeding ugly wound on your enemy. If it is possible, by the first strike … The lightly curved, just on one side sharpened blade glided along the body and armor to find the smallest opening to cause a cut.
If the first strike was not satisfactory the nomadic horseman had also a (classical) sword to fence or a kind of floret to thrust through the enemy armor. In modern times there been attempt to blend those three pole arms together; one of this attempts is the cavalry-sword which is indeed curved and could be used for cut, but this is not the classic saber. Trust me; a sword is a sword a (classical) saber is a saber.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:42:49 +0000

I might be possible that you are meaning scimitar but sabers are curved swords. The shape of the curved blade can vary, sometimes they are more and sometimes less curved. Mostly heavy cavalry was using straight bladed swords but during the WW2 times there was no heavy cavalry but the sword type should be called anyway palašš (palash). That kind of sword was meant both for cutting and thrusting.

By: Da

Da — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 18:37:30 +0000

Interesting. I thought it was true. My history teacher in a (german) school told us with the intend to show just how mean and evil the Nazis were by attacking an obviously outgunned enemy. The logic goes along the lines of “if the Polish had had any harmful intend, wouldn’t they have had tanks instead of cavalry – and this is proof the Nazis really surprised peacefull Poland.”

I guess you can spin any myth two ways…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 18:33:00 +0000

and i tought they had only pitchforks and bats, haha

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:22:43 +0000

People believe a lot of stupid things about matters which they have only the most superficial familiarity with and little interest in.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 15:21:41 +0000

“Saber” or “sabre” is a general term for any convex-curved sword, and more generally tends to be used for concave ones (eg. the kukri) as well – and for maximum confusion is occasionally used for the *straight* swords Modern Era heavy cavalry tended to use.

Anyways, the WW2-era ones were the real deal enough in design terms and unless the metallurgy had been totally fucked and/or the blade left without proper sharpening (neither, alas, an uncommon occurrence especially in the 19th century) oughta done well enough if the user had any idea of what he was doing. Which also wasn’t a given. Their extended use by cavalry forces isn’t very surprising though (although IIRC both the British and US cav opted for a specialised thrusting type for their last standard-issue designs instead), as the type oroginally developed among the Pontic steppe nomads (around 7th-8th century AD or so) specifically for the purpose and its main weakness, relatively poor armour-piercing ability, was a nonissue by the World Wars.

By: Szabcsi

Szabcsi — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:38:54 +0000

And believe me, sabers could do very mean wounds. Those gives a not to deep, but a very long cut, which difficult to titch.
Actually those swords are not really sabers; only the Persians and the Magyars en used real sabers. Those are even more mean weapons.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:35:18 +0000

It’s in the damn Wikipedia already you know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_invasion_of_Poland_(1939)#Misconceptions
As well as just about every detailed history of the invasion I’ve read.

By: Szabcsi

Szabcsi — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:32:50 +0000

Those are not kind words; it is the reality. And I have to know this verb in Polish but sorry I just remember … venger …. Once again sorry! Actually Your verb is without any fault, wouw nice work!