Depends what part of Earth you look at. I guess native Americans of that time had different favorites than swords, but I'm sure that the exact opposite of what you said applies to Europe, Asia or North-Africa.
Swords were far more common as a secondary weapon, save for the larger, two-handed variants which tended to appear in more specialised roles.
For almost all of history before the 20th century, the spear or a variant thereof (bayonets are essentially guns re-purposed into spears) dominated the battlefield, due to it's relative ease of handling, the simplicity of manufacture, as well as the ease with which the raw materials could be obtained (a spear uses far less metal than a sword/mace) and the effectiveness of a solid formation.
From what records we have (most probably highly biased, anyways), Native Americans (or rather, Incans) appear to be among the few cultures to employ one-handed swords as a primary weapon.
Almost no one in a European army would use a sword as their primary weapon, focusing instead on polearms and missile weapons for foot troops and some version of a lance for mounted combat (although, admittedly, a good portion of horsemen would probably get a fair amount of use from their backups).
From what I understand, Asia (primarily China and Japan and the related cultures) followed a similar pattern, with the eastern nomadic tribes favouring the bow.
My knowledge of African weaponry and in fact anything related to their military is fairly limited, due in no small part, I imagine, from the paucity of sources, but it's easy to imagine that, given the spear's obvious supremacy, they probably followed a similar approach to equipping their armies.
On the other hand, many members of medieval society would own a sword, given it's effectiveness as a personal defensive weapon, it's relatively small size in comparison with the typical weapons of war and, of course, the attribute that makes it so favoured by fantasy warriors...it's function as a status symbol.
You can wield a sword in one hand, leaving your other hand free to steady your horse, gesture to your followers, grasp trophies, hold your signifier of leadership, etc. You can also point with a sword, to urge your men forward, or make yourself more visible on a crowded battlefield.
Swords were often intricately decorated and painstakingly crafted for people of importance such as warlords, kings, generals, etc. Of course, said people would rarely, if ever, use the things...
And, of course, the main character of a fantasy setting is someone of great importance...and, as such, requires a weapon to demonstrate their status...and the thing that immediately comes to mind is a sword...
(11-25-2014, 09:30 AM)Thyrzul Wrote:
Though spears are similar to staff and I've seen techniques with staff/stick/baton (not the french kind of bâton) before. Also for some reason I feel that with less techniques to learn and use the aforementioned weapons are also less effective than swords are, but maybe that's just me being too much used to swordplay.
Spears are not used like staves, primarily because spears have one primary striking surface. A skilled spear user can defeat a swordsman in a duel, primarily because it's so damn hard to get close enough to land a blow when you have a pointy thing in your face all the time, but a spear really shines when employed en-masse on a battlefield...something which is rarely seen in the modern world thanks to the introduction of light, automatic firearms.