The progression from sword and buckler to rapier and dagger

[Jonny Vegrim]

Hi

I just read the article "The Sword & Buckler Tradition".

I'm a big fan of the general sword & shield genre, and this article gave me big pleasure in both information and references.

Just one question, as I'm trying to discern what ended the buckler, and why the dagger became a more popular replacement to wield in the left hand.

Is it right to discern that the buckler went "out-of-date" mainly because it was considered too brute and obvious for warly intent since the early 16th century? And that the rapier and dagger could (and were) less obvious for fighting intensions to be carried casually without the intent for war or fighting? Making it more accepted than appearing with full armor and a buckler everywhere.

Much like the modern soldiers carry automatic high-powered rifles on the battlefield, while ruffians and more civilized people just carry a gun or a more disclosed weapon, less obvious for their intent.

From what I can understand from the article "The Sword & Buckler Tradition" it was not because a dagger in the left hand were superior to the buckler that it got less used over time, but more because of a social status and possibly the lowered accepted vision on open street fights and brawls made clearly when carrying a buckler unless you were a soldier/guard.

Soon after it is logical that firearms and technology made it obsolete, and carrying only a rapier and/or a dagger was sufficient enough for the few man-to-man fights that occured. Just as we only have bayonette dagger/knifes on combat rifles today. I was mainly looking for info about if there were anything before the 16th century that made buckler or shield obsolete because of being superior in melee combat, but it seems to me that only technology and development killed it, which makes me sort of glad as this is my favorite medieval style of combat

Etc...
I just found out about ARMA yesterday, a great initiative. Nice forum with nice objective views and information. I'll have to be a long distance fan, as I live in sourthern Norway. Will perhaps try to travel to one of the future gatherings, would be great fun for me I think.

[Stacy Clifford]

Actually sword and buckler were still taught at least late into the 1500s by such as Di Grassi in 1570, and the term swashbuckler comes from young punks carrying a buckler on their hip as they swagger, possibly "swashing" against the sword in their belt. I believe there are examples of rapier and buckler, although I can't cite one right now. My experience though is that while a buckler is excellent against cutting attacks and the occasional thrust, it's not as useful against a narrower, more nimble weapon made only for quick thrusting. A dagger with curved quillons is more effective at intercepting and binding up a rapier. At that time the buckler was probably still seen more on the battlefield than in the streets. Like every other weapon, the buckler's use waxed or waned as the combat environment changed, but it lingered around a long time until guns finally took over for good.

[Jonny Vegrim]

Sorry, I meant early 17th century of course.

Thanks for your similar thoughts and interpretation.

I actually remember reading quickly about the term swashbuckler on one of the articles posted on this site. As you say young punks, but hitting their bucklers while looking for trouble and while fighting, causing the word "buckler" onto the word "swash", which came from the way they had wide swinging movements as their main strikes, "swashing" their swords toward their opponents.

Nice to finally understand the word I see referenced in so many movies and games, mostly under the scheme of pirates without a buckler, only with a rapier in their sash. I guess that only makes them "swashers"

[Jaron Bernstein]

During the wars of Italy, the Spanish made use of sword and buckler units to defeat pike formations.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

During the wars of Italy, the Spanish made use of sword and buckler units to defeat pike formations.

Nope--those were sword-and-target men. Their shields were fairly large and strapped to the arm rather than fist-gripped.

[Matt Bryant]

First off, welcome to the forum, Jonny. This is a good subject.

During the wars of Italy, the Spanish made use of sword and buckler units to defeat pike formations.

Nope--those were sword-and-target men. Their shields were fairly large and strapped to the arm rather than fist-gripped.

Really? All the sources that I can recall reading specifically say "buckler."

[LafayetteCCurtis]

First off, welcome to the forum, Jonny. This is a good subject.

During the wars of Italy, the Spanish made use of sword and buckler units to defeat pike formations.

Nope--those were sword-and-target men. Their shields were fairly large and strapped to the arm rather than fist-gripped.

Really? All the sources that I can recall reading specifically say "buckler."

Primary or secondary sources? Translated or in the original language? The Spanish and Italian primary sources are quite explicit in saying rotella or rodela rather than brochiero (or some other word for "buckler." This distinction is often lost when the text gets translated into English, especially if the translation was not done by a contemporary writer who understood the difference between buckler and target.