How would be the result if infantries used rapier & dag

[YIzhe LIU]

If infantries used rapier and dagger in the war or battle field,hou would the results be when against other one handed swords or two handed swords during 1500-1700? But these all depended Under the premise of the infantries were all very good at the rapiers and daggers.

Will it be nealy useless?

[Jonathan Hill]

I guess we did hijack your last thread in our own discussion. Short answer yes, but you should never take a short answer in this type of question.

As we mentioned in the last thread this depends on which type of blade you are inferring. The thin thrusting blade seems to be what you mean so I’ll work from that assumption. Again a few basics from this type of blade, it is good for thrusting against unarmored opponents, it is weak at cutting but will do light cuts against unarmored opponents, nothing fight ending but enough to make you take notice, or stop long enough for him to thrust a vital target. Against armored opponents it is virtually useless as you can only attack the gaps in the armor and a smart man in armor will protect those spots while he closes in and guts you.

A Thrusting Rapier on a battle field will be only marginally useful. The dagger may be of more use than the sword will be. This all depends on the armor used and the period of time the blade was more common, people were starting to use less armor than they had before. Also the main weapon used on the battlefield would have been a pike, or pole arm; spear like weapon.

If they are all good at using a Rapier and Dagger, then they should also be smart enough to switch to a larger blade that is more suited to the battlefield. A Rapier with a larger blade, as was mentioned in the other thread, is referred to today as a side sword, and the blade will be just as useful and suited to cut and thrust as any other battlefield sword.

As I train in Rapier and I commonly get to fight against a long sword, basket hilt, and side sword, the Rapier has an advantage of range and ‘quickness’ against those blades. In a one on one fight I generally have the advantage, and they are spending much of their time working to close the distance while I keep them away by thrusting at them. Once they are inside my thrusting distance the advantage moves to them.

[Sal Bertucci]

The other fact is that ANY sword is going to be a secondary weapon compared to the polearms used in infantry. No one is going to just arm an infantry unit with swords.

[Allen Johnson]

The other fact is that ANY sword is going to be a secondary weapon compared to the polearms used in infantry. No one is going to just arm an infantry unit with swords.

Not to mention swords ill-advised for this kind of combat. If our European ancestors had found it to be effective, they would have used it. They didn't.

[Peter Goranov]

Hmm..

Would rapier&dagger be useful versus a cavalry charge? no
Would it be useful versus armoured opponents? no
Would it be useful when fighting group/formation battles? no
Would it be usable when mounted? no
Is single combat the common deciding factor in medieval battles? no

My two cents.

[Benjamin Abbott]

Late sixteenth-century military writer Sir John Smythe expected pikemen to fight with sword and dagger in the press. He specifically instructed using the dagger to stab up under the tassets (or anywhere else a disarmed spot could be conveniently reached). Various Renaissance armies occasionally used this combination in the field, but nobody intentionally fielded troops armed only with swords/rapiers and daggers.

[Allen Johnson]

Now let's be sure that we don't confuse the type of "sword" that would be used in Sir John Smythe's pikes with a true "rapier". These were not the same type of weapon. Though they may have had a type of complex hilt, they were not the same type of swords Capo Ferro was using for his manual.

[Carl Rosenberg]

I believe that this question was answered by:

The Landsknechts
The pikeman with his "cut & thrust"
The Spanish with small shield or buckler with a
"cut & thrust" sword.

None of these battle formations, contemporary with the rapier, considered carrying a rapier into battle.