Unpopular take: the axe vs sword debate for medieval warfare is overblown

I keep seeing people swear axes were way better than swords in medieval combat, but I think that's a myth from too much TV and reenactment fights. Look at the 1415 Battle of Agincourt - the English longbowmen didn't win because of axes, they won with arrows and then swords when they closed in. Actual battlefield records from the 14th century show swords were the primary sidearm, not axes, because you could thrust and slash in tight formations. Axes were specialized tools for armored opponents or siege work, but a good arming sword was way more versatile 9 times out of 10. Has anyone else looked at period manuals or grave finds and noticed axes show up way less than people claim?

3 comments

3 Comments

riverdavis1mo ago

lol i feel called out, all my Skyrim characters run around with a battle axe like it's the only weapon in existence. but yeah, the grave evidence is pretty damning, i remember reading about that mass grave from Towton and it was like 95% blade injuries from swords, barely any axe marks. guess my virtual looting doesn't match real life, whoops.

jessica7071mo ago

yeah I feel this honestly. I've looked at a bunch of the grave finds from mass graves and stuff and it's mostly swords and daggers, axes are pretty rare. people hype them up but the evidence just doesn't back it.

shanef341mo ago

mostly swords and daggers" wait what? hold up, you're telling me axes are actually rare in graves? i always thought they were like the go-to weapon for vikings and medieval dudes based on all the movies and games. i've seen so many people online claiming axes were the "everyman's weapon" but if the actual digs show mostly swords and daggers then the hype really doesn't match the facts. that's wild to think about, like all those battle axes in pop culture might just be a big myth.