I got into an argument with a friend about swords in warfare scenarios; he claims that swords were literally never used with very few exceptions, I on the other hand claim that whilst swords weren't used as commonly as other battlefield weapons they were still used in serious combat throughout most of history.
Some of my arguments were things like the greatsword (zweihander, spadone, nodatchi and other similar swords), and historical accounts like Götz the iron hand (something I had on mind at the moment) who apparently was using a sword during the siege that he lost his hand.
His arguments were that a sword would be as good as useless against armour and the short reach would be a huge detriment against pole arms and cavalry.
So could anyone give some outside expertise on the subject?
This is a complicated topic as the subject of sword design and use spans huge amounts of recorded history and varies across cultures and time.
If we focus slightly more narrowly, to the age of ‘plate’ armors (perhaps the 13th-18th centuries) we can start to make more meaningful generalizations about the use of swords, even though there is still going to be a wide spectrum of implementation encountered.
Your friend’s argument is correct in so much as a combatant should not intend to try to ‘cut through’ heavy armor, regardless of what weapon they are armed with. This is especially true if they have a short arm such as a sword, but extends to almost all hand weapons, where the goal of melee combat is to try to overcome the protection of the foe, typically by finding weakness (there always will be) in the protections worn by the opponent. u/wotan_weevil has a great post detailing some of the techniques for combating heavily armored opponents in Europe in the ~15th century.
To that end, as more heavy types of armor and higher frequencies of heavily armored opponents appeared on the battle field, there is a tendency for more ‘heavy’ weapons to come about to help overcome these protections.
Examples of this can be seen in the Song dynasty in China, where heavy armors became more common and with them heavier sword blades
and heavy maces
https://www.mandarinmansion.com/images/chinese/jian-mace/jian-in-wubeiyaolue.jpg
In Europe too the rise of weapons such as warhammer, and flanged mace in the 14th century correspond with increase in armor usage, but at no point do swords go away. It is true that swords are often a secondary or backup weapon for a pitched battle: a footman might first have a missile weapon or polearm before needing to switch to a sword,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy#/media/File:Battle_of_crecy_froissart.jpg
and a mounted horseman would likely use a lance until it is broken or dropped before switching to the sword
But the advantage of a sword as a scabbarded side arm is that it is constantly available as personal protection, does not encumber the wearer much more than a large knife/dagger, can be used in all states of dress (fully armored, half armored, un armored), and can be used for fencing and defensive actions much more so than other similar hand weapons such as mace/axe/hammer. As a result, depending on the time and location, swords could well be more *numerous* than a given other battlefield weapon, as almost every combatant would have one in addition to whatever primary weapon they would also bear.
Thus the role of swords extended far beyond ‘just the battlefield’ and was often something that was used as a means of protection when traveling on journeys, or even in simple daily life. Its level of ornamentation helped convey your wealth and status in the world, and could be important to your standing in society. When it came time for war, a gentleman would certainly expect to continue wearing the sword, for the aforementioned reasons.
But even as armies began to become professionalized in the 16th century, swords continued to have roles on the battlefield. The famous landsknecht would wear short-sword Kaztbalgers in addition to either their Halberds or Muskets (or longer swords).
This 16th century painting of the Battle of Orsha also indicates that while some swords may have been better suited for combating armor (such as twohanded swords, and estoc) even single-handed sabres could potentially come to bare against heavily armored opponents.
While the role of swords on the battle field continued all the way into the 19th and early 20th centuries in the form of the ‘military pattern swords’, swords co-existed alongside guns. As evidenced by the instructions laid out by Dutch writer Johann Jacobi von Wallhausen in 1614, at a time when guns and heavy armor were still present, soldiers began to drill for things such as:
Using swords against armored opponents while mounted
https://hroarr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Wallhausen-Johann-Jacobi-von-1614-06.jpg
Killing a horse with a sword while unmounted
https://hroarr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Wallhausen-Johann-Jacobi-von-1614-10.jpg
Using swords against armored opponents who have killed your horse
https://hroarr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Wallhausen-Johann-Jacobi-von-1614-08.jpg
To hear a few more first hand accounts of period sword use perhaps you would enjoy to read
The Battle of Breiðabólstað ~1220
https://deremilitari.org/2016/09/warfare-in-thirteenth-century-iceland/
A 15th century account of Italian city-state warfare
https://deremilitari.org/2018/04/warfare-in-the-italian-city-of-perugia-in-1495/
Babur’s capture and loss of Samarkand ~1501
https://deremilitari.org/2013/03/baburnama-baburs-capture-and-loss-of-samarkand-1501/
Further reading
The Sword in the Age of Chivalry, Ewart Oakeshott ISBN-10 : 0851157157
Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight, Edge & Paddock ISBN-10 : 1862220018
