Best melee weapon of all time

[CmdrWilkens]

Ender said above that the gladius was the best weapon. This is false. Although superior in mass combat, with a tower shield and many comrades to help protect you, the gladius is actually not much more than a big, thick knife. In individual combat it's an invitation for someone with a weapon with more reach to kill you. As with any question of this kind, the answer depends very heavily upon context, and in most melee contexts, a weapon that combines power, reach, and versatility is strongest.

Well going off the middle scenario in the OP:

"Well-trained foot-soldier. The average soldier in a professional army. Probably capable of staying in a mutually supporting formation in almost any situation. Used for attack and defense."

Within that context the Gladius is close to the king though I would still contend that the late medievil pike formations (in paticular the famous Swiss pikemen) argue for the superiority of that weapon. Anyway the point being that for both of the first two scenario's under debate (under trained and well trained amidst a professional formation of similair combatants) we are talking about the weapon that peforms best in amutually supporting melee only formation. The board and blade or pike formation are two that were heavily dominant over centuries sp it certainly stands to reason that both have a lot to say for themselves.

[Zwinmar]

Untrained and trained: spear then pike, respectivly

However, I must differ with all of you for master. I go with shield, a staple for soldiers for millennia, on the north american plains the shields made with buffallo skull actually resisted bullets up to a certain point.

A shield, while seemingly only defensive, can be used offensivly.

[wautd]

Swordchucks!

sorry

[Maxentius]

However, I must differ with all of you for master. I go with shield, a staple for soldiers for millennia, on the north american plains the shields made with buffallo skull actually resisted bullets up to a certain point.

Source? That sounds very farfetched, honestly.

A shield, while seemingly only defensive, can be used offensivly.

Yes. The Romans knew it. That's what the big boss is for.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Well going off the middle scenario in the OP:

"Well-trained foot-soldier. The average soldier in a professional army. Probably capable of staying in a mutually supporting formation in almost any situation. Used for attack and defense."

If that's our criteria then the pike is the best answer because it prevents the enemy closing with you--gladius- and shield-bearing troops would be quite impotent against them, barring major advantage in terrain or generalship. The ability to keep your enemy on the other side of a dense hedge of spear-points makes the pike pretty much impenetrable to melee assault except in broken terrain.

[TC Pilot]

Isn't that essentially what a phalanx formation is, though? I can't really imagine Rome's infantry army was totally incapable of dealing with that.

[CmdrWilkens]

Isn't that essentially what a phalanx formation is, though? I can't really imagine Rome's infantry army was totally incapable of dealing with that.

The phalanx, however, requires the use of the shield as almost a pre-requisite since the formaitons are not trained to face in any direciton other than forward. The Swiss pike-square (and the later Tercio formaitons) were designed to manuever quickly into place and then be abl to face iany corner with 4-5 ranks of pike and halberd mixed together. The Phalanx was always weakest on the right where the last man was not fully covered so outflanking to your enemy's right while holding your own was the most straightforward and time-honored way of breaking a phlanx as it had no ability to shift and cover its exposed flank. So its a case where formation matters almost as much as the weapon as the pike/spear by itself is vulnerable to flanking attack when organized for line versus line battle, the pike-square is built to be able to refuse a flank if wielded appropriately and the phalanx isn't.

[TC Pilot]

So doesn't that mean it's a matter of training and formation, not the actual weapon? Or are the phalanx spears perhaps too long, inflexible, or clumsy for the rapid formation-change/deployment of a pike square?

[Marko Dash]

is there anything more modern that could surpass the pre-gunpowder stuff.

like a lightweight chainsaw with shield

[CmdrWilkens]

So doesn't that mean it's a matter of training and formation, not the actual weapon? Or are the phalanx spears perhaps too long, inflexible, or clumsy for the rapid formation-change/deployment of a pike square?

Honestly its probably more training than the weapon. The gladius/shield combination (actually I would even say the galdius/pilum/shield combination) was an incredibly effective tool and the Roman system lines of offense and defense made the most out of it. However the galdius and shield wall will always be much more vulnerable to cavalry wheras the pike in a proper square is excellent against cavalry and certainly a match for the Roman style sword/shield combo if properly utilized.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Weren't there defensive schemes where the Romans used their Pilum for cavalry defence?

[Thanas]

So doesn't that mean it's a matter of training and formation, not the actual weapon? Or are the phalanx spears perhaps too long, inflexible, or clumsy for the rapid formation-change/deployment of a pike square?

Honestly its probably more training than the weapon. The gladius/shield combination (actually I would even say the galdius/pilum/shield combination) was an incredibly effective tool and the Roman system lines of offense and defense made the most out of it. However the galdius and shield wall will always be much more vulnerable to cavalry wheras the pike in a proper square is excellent against cavalry and certainly a match for the Roman style sword/shield combo if properly utilized.

I wouldn't go that far. The Roman legions performed excellent against ancient cavalry and were more than a match for any pike formation they encountered. I also wouldn't say that the typical Roman legionnary at the time of Pydna was better trained than the macedonian hoplite.

I further would argue that simply putting one roman cohort vs a pike formation is a somehow unfair comparison, since fighting like that was not the roman way. A more apt combination would be a roman cohort in the center, with skirmishers up front, archers and artillery in the back plus a line of auxillaries, mostly spearman. Note that the romans always performed worst when they were unable to form into combined arms formations.

A somewhat forgotten fact is that in the beginning of the third century the romans started fielding a specialized phalanx corps (for lack of a better word) which used pikes. However this proved unsuccesful in comparison to the usual Roman anti-cavalry tactics and within twenty years the Roman army was back to the original formations.

Finally, we have the final evolution of the combined arms formation in the fourth century, where the romans once again used specialized formations, the lanciarii. However these did not fight in pike formations per se, but were instead used together with the usual legionnairies. By all accounts they were very succesful until they perished at Adrianople.

Weren't there defensive schemes where the Romans used their Pilum for cavalry defence?

Yes, you can read about one example here.

[Master_Baerne]

Isn't the Bayonet an offshoot from the Venerable spear? After all, during the Napoleonic era, there were still cavalry charges to be deal with.

Granted, the Bayonet still has use for close quarter fighting.

Of course it was, but it's easily a separate weapon system, seeing as it's useless without a firearm to attach it to

I was going to say this, but it occurred to me that, as CmdrWilkens so aptly put it, the bayonet is a development of the musket. With that in mind, my choices are

1) The pike, being easy to use and effective against cavalry, in addition to all the varied reasons others have put forward.

2) Again, the pike. The added cohesion and skill gained from trained troops enhances the usefulness of the pike by a very great deal.

3) A simple longsword. Now, being a fencer, I'm slightly biased, but it's my experience that a sword is the most versatile pre-gunpowder weapon around.