(11-25-2014, 10:00 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: Spears worked as long as you could keep your opponent far enough, get closer and you are screwed against a sword (especially if it cuts the pole of your spear in half).
No such thing as "too close" with any melee weapon. Granted, there is an optimum range at which you can employ the intended striking parts, but the haft of the weapon can also be used to inflict damage or push your opponent back to where you can stab them again. As for "cutting a spear pole in half"... have you ever actually tried to do that? Especially against someone who is aware of and opposing you.
(11-25-2014, 10:00 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: As the blade is fully made of metal, it could serve as both an offensive and a defensive tool (master cuts in the early-Liechtenauerian tradition are pretty much for that, block and hit with the exact same move). Same goes for knives, get close enough that even swords are useless and they come into play during wrestling. Because of this you can't clearly define which was the primary or secondary because they worked for different ranges. On top of that, as there existed polearms of different sizes (pike, spear, etc), there were also swords of different sizes (one-handed sword, one-and-half-handed/bastard sword or longsword, montante, two-handed sword, etc.).
Again, you make the mistake of thinking that if you get too close to a spearman, he is helpless. Whilst a common misconception, it is still not true.
I will grant you that it takes some training and expertise to understand how to use the spear in a duel, but you essentially have a giant lever, which, if employed correctly, can be used to place your opponent wherever you need him.
(11-25-2014, 10:00 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: Though I can mostly speak for European martial arts, I can say that out of many kinds of melee weapons, swords were used the most widely. In battles, in duels, 'blossfechten' or in full armor. Status symbol? Nah, rather if somebody had a horse or a shiny armor, or maybe both, I'd say a full set would be a status symbol, but swords only? Or just to point at things while looking cool on a white horse? Naaah. They were weapons. They are weapons.
Swords were common duelling weapons due to their prevalence and their precision (you'd need spectators to stand well back if a duel were to be conducted with, say, poleaxes). As for status symbols, check out the number of ornate/ceremonial swords that were forged and compare that to the number of ceremonial spears...
(11-25-2014, 10:00 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: EDIT: Having a pointy thing in your face all the time can also be achieved against a sword (have experienced that a few weeks ago in a duel), but then whether it's a spear or a sword, it can be hit away, at which point all it matters is how quick you can swing your weapon. And at that, the sword beats the spear.
Also you can't do much else than stab with spear, while with sword you can also slice.
Not being an expert at spear duelling, I can't really comment, but I have seen good spearmen hold swordsmen at pole's length and not be in any real danger from receiving a sword stroke. Thanks to the fact that a polearm's grip points extend all the way to the head, you can get surprisingly precise control over it's striking surfaces.
Also, many polearms have much more versatility than a sword. My favourite, the poleaxe, allows you to stab, swing, grapple, damage on the recovery from a stab, hook, trip and all manner of dirty tricks thanks to it's wide variety of heads as well as it's shaft.
Ultimately, however, the efficacy of spear vs sword cannot be compared by examining their performance in a duel, as most battlefields involved the engagement of bodies of men, and this was where the polearm shined. A large formation of men with spears could quite easily hold off soldiers with shorter weapons, as well as stop a cavalry charge dead in it's tracks. This is why the pike became the dominant weapon on the battlefields of Renaissance Europe.