A question regarding Rapiers..

[Guest]

Hello, I and my friends are in dispute due to lack of professional knowledge that all others here seem to have. So, could you please let me know whether rapier is more like a thin, circular-bodied blade with cup-like hilt, or much broader than that? Thanks.

BP.

[Craig Peters]

Black Prince,

You will note, if you take a look at the webpage that appears before connecting to the forum, that it clearly states:

"To participate, all user profiles require a complete first and last legal name, you must identify yourself, no pseudonyms or nicknames."

Just so you know....

Craig

[Webmaster]

BP, please read our forum rules and re-register using your real name. We do not allow pseudonyms on this forum.

A rapier is basically a four-foot needle with a long narrow thrusting blade and little or no edge for most of its length, except maybe the last few inches. The blade cross section might be diamond-shaped, hexagonal, triangular, or even star-shaped, but never circular to my knowledge. They are not designed for cutting at all. The variety of hilt styles includes cup hilts among a dazzling variety of hilt styles mostly based on rings, knuckle guards and other swept metalwork. Broader blades with full-length edges were meant for both cutting and thrusting, and most of us would not define them as true rapiers.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi,

Stacy is right that rapiers are not designed to be able to cut well. This does not mean that they can't. Many rapiers distally taper until the blade is almost flat at the tip of the blade.

Due to their balance and blade profile, a rapier will never be a great cutter but being hit in the face or on the wrist with one is still being hit with 3 lbs of steel with an edge on it. Even without an edge this would hurt and in shirtsleeves the cut would be disabling.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Tony_Indurante]

Stu,

I think this is one of those topics that we all agree on, but we just have different terminology- when I say that rapiers don't cut, I am talking about a fight ending blow- the killing stroke if you will. You are not going to cause a killing stroke with the edge of the rapier, that is what the point is for. Cuts in rapier play are to set up the thrust.

As far as the cut from a rapier being disabling- well it's possile that it could disable, but I wouldn't bet my life on it and would quickly follow with a thrust to kill my oponent.

[John_Clements]

Sigh...you know, I still can't understand why people hold some of the opinions they do despite the preponderance of evidence right before us from historical fights and duels regarding rapiers and "cuts."

I've examined by hand more than 60 antique rapiers from the 16th & 17th century in 6 countries, and with little exception, their points actually were thicker in cross section, not flatter and thinner. This is because they need exactly this kind of cross-sectional shape in order to effectively puncture. When thin or flat they snap.

And while a rapier might weight 2 pounds or so, the section that impacts on any slashing blow does not equate to its entire mass ---let alone the edge having any sufficient bevel or width to inflict a serious cutting blow that would "disable" even a limb. Hence, the lack of such incidents in historical accounts of rapier combats and the lack of such techniques described as incapacitating in the fencing literature from the period. This is also born out by our own considerable test cutting experiments on raw meat with replicas and authentic pieces.

Any edge blow with any sword may be classified as a “cut” (in contrast to a thrust with the point) but there are vastly different degrees of “cut” depending on the type of sword, and rapiers do not cut well at all. That’s not what they were created for. It’s simple geometry. Which is precisely why wider cutting swords were designed they way they were. I hope someday people will stop imagining things about rapiers.

JC

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi John,

My point of view on this subject can be summarised rather easily.

If the manual tells me to thrust, I thrust. If the manual tells me to cut, I cut. If the manual tells me to do either, only then do I get to choose which.

My chosen master for the rapier is Joseph Swetnam and indicatively, his first guard is designed to both allow and protect against a falling wrist cut which to me speaks volumes for the importance of cutting in English rapier play at the very least.

I most certainly conceed that things may well have been different on the continent.

I would also like to clarify that I am talking about a percussive edgeblow with the debole when cutting with the rapier and not the "ripping tip cut" that many seem to favour. I see very little evidence for the latter at all.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Steven Engelbach]

Indeed, Fabris gives techniques both for delivering cuts and for defending against cuts, as does Alfieri. Certainly a rapier won't remove a limb with a cut, but given the number of cuts in Alfieri (10 out of 15 plates of rapier-alone techniques present cuts as valid attack options) I think that there are only 2 conclusions: 1. the manual was more an instruction for sport play, or 2. they were effective enough to include as techniques. Given the tone of the manual, I'd have to vote for the 2nd option. Still, the thrust is highly favored by every rapier master I have read, and I'd certainly never use a cut where I could successfully use a thrust.

I do find that a nice cut to the head works well on an aggressive opponent who continues closing in situations where we have voided each other's points (and if he keeps coming, a pommel to the face). But that is sport play and doesn't speak to the effectiveness of a cut--plus, it's the anecdotal experience of a relative novice (me).

Steve

[Mike Cartier]

i have tried to cut with rapiers I have, one heavy and stiff the other lighter and a bit floppier. in both cases I would say that were i to be in a duel that using my edge to cut would be literally suicidal.
For the following reasons.

1. It takes my point dramtically offline
2. it requires way too much energy and arm strength, 2 or 3 rapier cuts and i can barely control my Rapier anymore.
3. To do any sort of damage with the cutting edge you would have to whip it like crazy exaggerating the above problems even more.

Seems to me that Rapier use is about maniacal efficiency

Just my 1.5 cents on the subject.

[Steven Engelbach]

Certainly employing a cut can be very dangerous because of the fact that you move your point out of line. Also because it takes 2 tempi to deliver (1 to prepare, 1 to cut) compared to 1 tempo for a thrust. OTOH, it can be safely executed with the right preparation or under the right circumstances:

Plate #30 in Fabris gives a nice technique where the victor delivers a cut to the head of his opponent while parrying his opponent's blade with his hilt. Thus, the victor has ensured his own safety (because plates 26-28 and 38 show what happens if you use a cut without seeing to your safety).

Alfieri's cuts, OTOH, usually seem to be attacks to the leg made after feinting to the face, or sabre-style stop-cuts to the weapon arm just above the wrist, delivered while voiding. These are all done in such a way that the rapierist delivering the cut has not disregarded his own safety (Alfieri's plate #10 shows what happens if you don't ensure your safety when using a cut. Interesting in this plate how, after telling you that thrusts are deadlier, Alfieri gives some counters that are also cuts).

As to the effectiveness of cuts in a "real" (i.e. sharp steel) rapier encounter, I don't have any real experience with this, having never fought unprotected with sharp steel. However, I'm not willing to regard my judgement (or anyone else's) over that of the masters (but also noting that the masters all say that the rapier's thrust is more effective than its cut).

Steve

[Webmaster]

I think something to remember here, as I mentioned above, is the variable blade geometry of rapiers, which were pretty individualistic weapons. One with a flattened diamond cross section might be capable of delivering a light cut, but try the same thing with a triangular or star-cross-sectioned blade and you are executing a hard slap with a steel bar (excluding the tip scratch). Still enough to make an aggressive opponent wince, but definitely not a disabling action. I don't know what kind of rapier Alfieri was using; perhaps the regional style was a little more blade-like, I don't know, but the point is (yes, pun intended) even subtle differences in form may affect how the sword is used.

Also, I've been lucky enough to handle one real rapier and two exquisite replicas, and it's pretty obvious that the balance is set with point control for thrusting as the goal. As I've heard John say, it's like a laser beam pointing wherever you want it to go with almost no effort; it practically begs you to thrust. A cutting sword, on the other hand, is balanced more to assist in rotation, and the difference is noticeable. That's not to say that a rapier can't be used with a cutting motion, but you don't use a screwdriver to do a hammer's job.

[leam hall]

"I don't know what kind of rapier Alfieri was using; perhaps the regional style was a little more blade-like, I don't know, but the point is (yes, pun intended) even subtle differences in form may affect how the sword is used."

Which begs the question about the sources referenced; do they discuss the blade geometry or build of the weapon? John said he's handled quite a few rapiers, but is his definition the same one the author of the book was using? Are we actually talking about the same thing?

FWIW, I'm a newbie too, so feel free to disabuse me of my illusions...

[Casper Bradak]

Hey Stuart, did you notice Joseph Swetnam says this as well?


"Also, take headeth that thou strike not with thy rapier, for so thou may breake it, and bring thy self to thine enemies mercy, and it may be he will take the advantage of thee".

[Joachim Nilsson]

Plate #30 in Fabris gives a nice technique where the victor delivers a cut to the head of his opponent while parrying his opponent's blade with his hilt. Thus, the victor has ensured his own safety (because plates 26-28 and 38 show what happens if you use a cut without seeing to your safety).

Is it this http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/Fabris/book1/04011061.jpg plate that you are referring to?

If so: is your view reflected in the text? Or is your view based on the picture alone? Because judging from the picture alone that could just as well be a thrust to the head. IMHO.

Now I haven't read Fabris but Dr. Sidney Anglo writes in his Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe (p.117-118) that:

...as far as published treaties are concerned, Capoferro's Gran simulacro and Giganti's Scola (along with Fabris's Scienza) are the first which advocate the lunge for all attacks, and the effects are intended to be devastating. The majority of the plates in these works, and in those of their many imitators, show fencers thrusting through an opponent's chest, abdomen, face, head, eyes, neck, mouth or throat.

So isn't that which is shown in that picture more of a (thrusting) lunge that a cut? Or does the related text say otherwise?

Regards,

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Casper,

I most certainly have noticed that passage and can only surmise that Swetnam is talking of blows other than the wrist blows he seems quite fond of. I can certainly see his point when it comes to full arm blows and agree that these are in general dangerous to the offender at single rapier or rapier and dagger.
Cheers,
Stu.