Defeated by rapier...

[Mike Chidester]

Actually, as George Silver commented, duels with a cutting sword might leave one maimed or scarred, but duels with the rapier were typically lethal. The rapier leaves dealier wounds (they didn't know how to treat stab wounds then), while at the same time its wounds aren't immediately debilitating, dragging out the fight and making more wounds likely. He also described it as "a weapon suited only for murder in the streets", which is pretty accurate.

The rapier was as deadly as its edged counterparts, and included the same systems of grappline and wrestling (and thus, arm breaks and locks and the like). It was only when the weapon passed into the hands of nobles (who made it a smallsword) and teaching passed into the hands of dance instructors (who made fighting a dance), that the martial elements disappeared.

[John_Clements]

Yeah, re duels and changes, the purpose of such single combat is the ritual of the challenge and risk of death and killing, not necessarily the destruction of your opponent. That's the main dif.

Gotta run

JC

[Mike_McGurk]

So basically fighting with the rapier finds parallels in modern day knife fighting. A fight with single edged slashing blade can last up to five minutes after the first hit, meaning both parties could very bleed out.

[s_taillebois]

M. Clement's, as you note, the nature and effect of duels was different. As much as anything, these were a long lingering residual of the old trial by combat, to ascertain 'truth'.
I should have quantified 'lethality' more clearly. In aristocratic duels, as would be similar to warfare, broken arms, death and such were obviously possible. However, the nature of the rapier, made some aspects of this 'better'. A common practice during this period, for deaths, was for the elder women of the family to wash and prepare the corpse for the wake. And use of the rapier, minimized the chance that these women would have to literally sew the corpse back together. And since 'laying in state' was an important symbolism for the aristocracy...presentation of the corpse was fairly important. <One of the effects of this attitude was all the effigy tombs from the Gothic and Renn. And some weirder stuff, the "Knight of Bes" was embalmed in honey and sealed up in a lead sheet-have never found a source which clearly stated why>
So, in some ways, use of the rapier would have been a kindness (of sorts) to the man's mother, wife or eldest daughter.
The social status of burials, relates to some strange behavior by these distant antecedents and ancestors...the manner of death and how one was laid to rest, were indicative of status.
Often the application of violence by the old aristocracy, was weirdly linked to status. Hence rapier duels, being beheaded and such, versus knife brawls, and being drawn and quartered...the wrong manner of death was a loss of face.
From our perspective, all would be appalling...from theirs...the manner was as important as the end.

[Robert Murphy]

Hullo Ladz,

Much food for thought here...

A couple of tidbits to add:

During the American Civil War, the cavalry sabres of standard issue for both sides were (of course) designed for both hacking and stabbing; a sharply-pointed sword with a curved, honed edge. (OK, you all probably already knew what a sabre looks like... <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> ) While not common, hand-to-hand duels (mounted or on foot) between opposing cavalrymen were not rare. Tellingly, an veteran calvaryman could quickly recognize a green opponent: such a foe primarily would hack, not stab. Time and again, experience showed that wounds delivered by a sabre's edge--however unpleasant--were rarely significantly debilitating (at least in the heat of battle), let alone lethal. Stabbing wounds however, while more difficult to inflict, were far more likely to be fatal.

Let me add to Michael's (entirely necessarily) morbid post; there is one area of the torso where a sufficient stab wound would in all likelihood be not only lethal, but paralyzingly debilitating: a stab to the kidneys. Inflicting such a wound would not be easy. (I have NO experience with swordfighting/fencing etc., but I presume a thrust to the enemy's lower-back area would be difficult; harder to land than, say, a strike to the chest...) However, (and here things get gruesome,) stabbing an opponent in the kidney would 'achieve' two results: a pain so agonizing as to effectively paralyze an enemy, followed by a (merciful) death seconds later. (This is often how British commandos would silently dispatch German sentrys in WWII.)

All very nasty business; believe me, I only mention this as a possible 'tactical consideration'; I take no pleasure in the ghastly details...

Robert

P.S. Oh, and Grant, why are you Australians all such creampuffs?

JOKE!!!! JUST KIDDING, and only because I know there is at least one ocean between us. (Generally, I am of the belief that ribbing an Australian, is not the path to greater life expectancy.) <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Mike_McGurk]

What kind of surprises me is that the aorta artery isn't shown on the diagram. It's buried behind a few organs, but a puncture wound there would certainly end a life. It wouldn't be immediate death but the agony would certainly cause the fighter to faulter and impair his fighting ability. His combat ability would further deteriorate as blood rushes out into the abdominal cavity resulting both in increase pressure on the organs and serious blood loss. Death would likely occur in the next 1-3 minutes and would be unavoidable.

[Grant Hall]

Creampuff? Are you trying to insult me or make me hungry?
Listen I don't mind, you can rib me as much as you want, just two things, one Im not Australian I just live here, Im South African, and two, just dont insult my ancestors by ever calling EMA the invincible immortal arts, and calling WMA hack and slash crap.
other than that Im sweet I dont mind what people say, I guess Im just sick of the negative publicity WMA keeps getting by Power Ranger Wannabes.

Anyway I gotta run,

Cheers.

[Grant Hall]

Oh and with all this talk about debilatating thrusts and puncture wounds, try striking bone and watch your opponent turn white from the pain, they'll sweat so much they'll drop their sword. (I know this because I had a 1 and a 1/2 foot circus tent spike peirce my inner thigh and strike the bone. If I wasn't wearing fairly tight and strong denim jeans it most likely would have shattered the bone and possibly found an artery <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> I guess Im one of the lucky few <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" /> huh)

Cya's

[John_Clements]

Hi Steven,
I've seen some eividence that rapiers were deemed good to fight with by the aristocracy becuase they did not scar a nobleman's face the way a cutting balde would should he be killed, and that such apppearance was a social-cultural concern. But I've never seen anything related to what you suggest about it being a kindness to family survivors (perhaps for an open casket funeral kind of thing). Makes some sense, but do you have any sources for this supposition? Thanks.

JC