For me, as a spaniard, this is 'espada ropera' (rapier sword). Literally a sword that is worn with clothes, the clothes to go around the city or town. And as a 'Verdadera Destreza' student, we would make a distinction between early rapiers and late rapiers. Greetings from the Academia Da Espada (A Coruña), Spain.
Espada means spade or a stright double edged sword/blade. Ropera is cloths from ropa meaning clothing. So literally clothing/dress sword. Dress sword adapted from Bilbo sword that originated Basque city of Bilbao/ Bilbo in english. These very short swords or long daggers depending on perspective were common place among sailors, pirates & criminal though out the old & new world. If a pirate didn't use a cutlass/ hanger they used a Bilbo that got fancy with a bit more length as the fashion called a dress sword. I have sperate comment going into far more general detail.
I'm reminded of something Ian from Forgotten Weapons said in a video on the difference between SMG and PDW. People make weapons to fit their needs, not to be categorised so there will always be grey areas.
Elegantly put, things can fit multiple rolls and purposes. Imagine if people psychically communicated and didn't have to worry about using the right words. No argument over with something's called just seeing what's in there mind.
That's a good example. Two select-fire weapons in the same exact caliber with slightly different configurations could have very different intended purposes. Even the same base firearm in different configurations could serve different roles. The Uzi and MP5 come to mind.
Maybe, but consider how we are today--we very much classify almost everything. Who's to say they didn't have their own classification that we just don't understand?
To think, until I found this channel, I was pretty much just a longsword and katana fan. Now, I'm a fan of all sorts of swords... Anyway, it does explain why rapier descriptions seemed to vary.
In Swedish we have the historical name värja and it is really the type of hilt that defines it; a hilt with fingerrings and some hand protection unlike earlier swords with cross guard hilt and later swords with sabre hilts. So both a rapier and a side sword is a värja; but a stötvärja (Thrusting värja) is a rapier and huggvärja (Cutting värja) is a cut and thrust side sword. That's why the Swedish m.93 cavalry sword Matt has is called a sabre in Swedish; because it has a sabre hilt even thou it has a straight blade. The hilt decides the name.
For this type of weird scenarios actually spanish started using the term "ropera" in the late 17th century, until then in many manuscripts you will see that they call them simply "espada", which means sword. Later on comes the term ropera to differentiate a civillian purpose sword from a war oriented one, like the side sword that appears in 10:05, they started using again a term which was written in the "Quijote", that term being "espada tajadora" that would translate as slashing sword or slasher in english. So... You could say that a rapier is just a blade that is being carried as part of your outfit, like a hat, a cape etc.
@@n.w.1803 It was the equivalent, they just took it and literally pronounce it using their phonetic rules. Same would happen with the term "gentil hombre" and 'gentleman'
Thanks for the explanation. I feel that in spanish we have SO FEWER words to differentiate things than in english; that this "Ropera" thing is really our little exception, haha.
@@defaultytuser Don't feel bad. Modern English contains literally about twice as many words as any other language. At least we don't have to learn 10,000 Chinese characters...well, not yet..
'The gentleman was armed with a pistol.' That phrase in a newspaper would indicate totally different pistols in 1810, 1870, 1920 and 2024. But at the time it would have been clear what they were to the readers of that newspaper. We tend to lump hundreds of years in the middle ages and later on together, thinking that the people at the time had no idea of the state-of-the-art of their contempory side arm technology.
I often think about the weapon divisions in Meyer, between schwert (sword, what we'd call a longsword), dussack (basically saber), and rappier (rapier, which we'd today call sidesword). I think it's interesting how, in-period, they had words for various types of sword, but they did usually also have "sword" swords, which could mean anything from an arming sword to a longsword to a rapier depending on where and when you asked.
And for some reason, Japanese swords are always called, "swords" by speakers of European languages, despite the fact that a single-edged, slightly curved blade might more properly be called a sabre, or even something like the kriegsmesser (they have a similar sort of construction)...come to think of it, I actually have a book of weaponry from the mid-late 1800s that refers to the "sabres" of the "samourai." But that was a book that payed more attention to aesthetics and ornament than to the functional aspects of the weapons..
In what an archaeologist might term "systematics" this "sword" sword vs. various kinds, is a class vs type question. One reason there is so much confusion is because there are so many distinct ideas about how one differentiated members of the class. I grew up considering rapiers were swords with long, narrow blades. I "logically" concluded, still being in grade school, that "broadswords" were just swords with wider blades than rapiers. it wasn't until I was in high school that I achieved the degree of confusion we enjoy at present.
I would love to see a video on the oddest combinations of blades with hilts that you have come across. I know you have shown military sabers where the soldier will keep the regulation hilt but use a different blade to stay somewhat in regulation but as you mentioned the sidesword's hilt could be placed on any number of blade styles... what are some of the head scratchers that you have come across?
As a German these classifications are particularly interesting, because historically we lumped rapier, small swords, foils and I think even spadroons together under the term "Degen" which is so broad I find it completely useless 😂 But I'm not sure in what aspects Germany differed from the rest of Europe here. I think that in the 19th century with all these horrible "fencing" fraternities all new terms (and objects?) like "Korbschläger" (basket beater) were introduced that didn't really help either 😅
well, at least some of the Degen could be differentiated by the lovely term Haudegen ... if you actually applied that to a sword rather than a person xD
These two aren't related, though. Meaning "hero" it's a Germanic term found as early as the 9th ct., I believe (thegan), but meaning a kind of weapon it appears to be a 14th century loan from French and the etymological counterpart of "dagger" (it's not quite clear what exactly these early occurances of the word denoted, the known use was obviously later, when rapiers etc. were around).
This particular phenomenon in German has led to a conundrum in the study of the great composer J.S. Bach... at least for me😅! In about 1705, while working in the small town of Arnstadt, Bach got into a fairly heated scuffle with another musician (a bassoonist to be exact), and it's well documented that Bach drew some sort of blade to defend himself. However, due to this extremely broad German term, Degen, I have never been able to ascertain exactly what type of weapon Johann Sebastien pulled on this guy! Some sources say "dagger", while others say "sword", and the renowned Bach scholar John Elliott Gardiner says "rapier"! So, I've never been able to figure out if Bach was just wearing a smallsword, which were certainly popular among German court employees of that period, or if he was carrying some manner of actual dagger, which in a sense, I would find to be more interesting. By the way, there is also a type of very long dagger/shortish sword that emerged in late medieval Switzerland that was sort of a continuation of the Basilard, and it was called the Degen. They had hilts somewhat like the "Swiss daggers" or "Holbein daggers" worn by German military officers during WW2, but had VERY long blades (sometimes two ft.!). I wonder if this weapon could be the earliest usage of the term Degen that you were referencing...
@@andreweden9405 regarding bach, i vote for a small sword or some kind of dagger. i don't think geyersbach would have attacked him with a stick if he was wearing a full-length rapier!?
I always think of the word, "Degen," as I do an older Norse word, "Mækir". If it's too long to be a dolch but neither schwert nor messer then it must be a degen. Clear as mud, as they say.
French language has been stagnating for a while, because the French government has power to regulate the language itself (sounds like total nonsense to me.)
@@wserthmar8908 it doesn't, it (or rather the language council, which most countries/languages have) has the right to regulate the standardised, official form of it, that is what you learn at school, use in documents and formal settings
@@Sk0lzky That seems like a difference only in semantics. And no, it's basically only French that has such a thing. In fact basically every French-speaking country has their own separate one, that's how much of a French thing it is.
@@Sk0lzky if they have the power to regulate the standard official version of the language... That is the govt having the power to regulate the language, so the other guy wasnt wrong.
In czech it is even more confusing, because 'kord' (possibly from latin chorda - string) means rapier and 'rapír' means smallsword. Furthermore I believe that forms of messer were still quite prevalent, filling the niche of cut and trust sword for the millitary and lower clases. But in english your argument hulds up well.
I've always interpreted the simple use of "sword" to suggest it's referring to types of sword that are historically well established, and what the average person, and culture is most familiar with. So to determine what is being referred to by "sword", you can probably just look at the recent prior generations of sword and find the commonalities between them; and to determine what they mean by the more specific "rapier", look for what are the newer kinds of sword (perhaps particularly for what's been imported) and look for the common traits of those swords
Like how a TV nowadays is most likely a flatscreen OLED of quite the size with a remote, but even 40 years back it would have meant a relatively small CRT with the controls on the set that most likely could display colour.
@@dr.krimson1010 We feel the need to specify when it's different from what people might assume. Like in the future, (assuming things continue as they're going), nobody's going to feel the need to say "I have an electric car", because it will be assumed that every car is electric. Right now, people specify because they're not the norm
Sword is just a generic taxonomy like vehicle or radio. It could mean a bicycle or a walkie-talkie as easily as it could an SUV or a modem or a boat or an airplane or a kick scooter or a police scanner or a CB or a HAM or even one of those consoles you listen to music on or a Sony Walkman. And don't write off internal combustion just yet! Making batteries for cars generates as much CO2 as if you drove around an old Lincoln Towne Car for 15ish years. We'd all be using hydrogen fuel cells except it takes more energy to produce the stuff from electrolysis than it generates when you turn it back into water-at least right now. Whether it's hydrogen or some sort of ethanol-based biofuel, time will tell. The race is on.
idk if it’s incorrect, its just the common situation of “word in the sense of _” where the context is the key. like if i say pass the dijon, i mean in the sense of the mustard, not the actual place. meaning “the mustard in the dijon style”. or (neck)tie vs tie (a knot). a word can have multiple senses depending on how, when, and why its employeed. its just important to recognize them and when it’s appropriate to use them. like when you are dealing with classifications, it becomes useful to distinguish a rapier from a small sword. but maybe in a story someone uses “rapier” to describe a foil, since the intent is to get across “a thrusting item” rather then distinguishing blade types more specifically.
The word "ropera" is very rare in 16th-17th century Spanish sources, in my experience, although I haven't researched it extensively. They mostly use "espada". I think the term fell out of use in Spanish as soon as the 15th century, interestingly enough, just as the term was spreading abroad. It only resurfaces in 19th century museum catalogues, probably influenced by the continued use in French and English sources.
That was really interesting. I've noticed in the very detailed paintings of Vrancx and Sneyer, covering the Thirty Years War, lots of long, straight bladed complex hilted weapons being carried and used so I think you've hit the nail on the head (in my humble opinion) on the sword / rapier description and difference. Incidentally, I think I own the rapier shown at 07:03 - which has a triangular blade section.
Hi. Very nice presentation. And I think your are correct. I will preface by stating that I am french and NOT a specialist or scholar in the matter. From my understanding, in France, the "rapière" comes from Spain. As you said. It is an "épée", straight blade with double edge, but the blade is long and narrow, so it is nimble and thrust oriented. More suited for civilian use/duel, I don't think it was ever considered for war. AND it must have an ornate full or half basket hand guard. Your beautiful antique is one. The nice replica is not, the blade is too broad and the edge are not "parrallele", it looks like a battle/war sword. Cheers. PS: it is kind of funny, a single edge curved blade is a "sabre" in Fance, not a "broad sword", wich translate as "épée large" and doesn't exist in french.
Can you do a History of the Rapier video? I'm curious as to where it came from, how did it catch on, what part did it play in life and it's final iterations, and maybe future ideas. Great work! Thanks for making swords so fun!
Interestingly, I'm learning about Bronze Age Britain, and there are swords from the middle bronze age called 'rapiers' since they're for stabbinge. The early ones seem a lot more like extremely long daggers to me but I suppose it makes sense they're called rapiers since over time they gain more of a cutting edge and evolve into proper bronze swords.
@@trikepilot101 I haven't made a very extensive study on those blades, but the earliest writing I recall seeing that term used in for them was Oakshott's "Archeology of Weapons".
The preferable form of a blade depends on your fencing style! So the rapier was the weapon of choice if you preferred the way faster thrusting technics. On horseback the weapon of choice was a cutting blade, which made sabers a typical cavalry weapon. In Germany a rapier was often called a "Raufdegen" or "spanish raufdegen". "Degen" is synonymous for all straight blades in contrary to the sabre with a curved blade.
My Windlass 'Agincourt' sword is interesting to compare to the rapier; being a blade clearly designed more to the thrust (probably by half-swording) but with some genuine cutting ability and an overall configuration more like a hand=and-half arming sword (including only the classic T quillon).
Does anyone know what the swrod at the 10:00 minute mark is? Opening its classification I mean specifically. It's very cool and I want one LOL 😄 - also if you know anything about its quality... Or a recommendation for something very similar with better quality I would love to know.
Fun Fact: In german the term rapier was not used before the term for the smallsword (Degen). So sometimes if someone is talking about a Rapier, he can actually mean a smallsword/historic epee. "Stoßdegen" means thrusting epee, which was a common name for rapiers in german speaking countries.
@@brittakriep2938 That's not the general word for it, that only describes a special kind of smallsword worn at court. Smallswords were also civilian weapons, i can't imagine the average civilian gentleman called his Degen a Hofdegen...
@@Blutroth : I am Brittas boyfriend, no real expert in historic weapons. I only know Degen as german word for smallswords , spadroons, sideswords, rapiers, fencing epee, duelling epee and in widest view also heavy cavallry sword ( Pallasch). This means weapons mostly used for stabbing. But i don' t really know a german word, which describes exactly and only a civilian smallsword. In novels or nonmilitary museums you can find the noted words, but, as you surely know, novel writers or museum staff often have no real knowledge about weapons. And the civilian smallsword, used by high and low noblemen, rich nonnobles ( Patrizier or british ,gentry'), may be men of upper middleclass or high/ important officials was not only used as a weapon, but was also a sign for status and authority. And : As a person with Asperger disorder it is not so easy, to explain, what i think.
@@brittakriep2938 Thanks for your answer...im a native German speaker..just find it unrealistic that they called them all Hofdegen. In the 18th century they called a lot of duelling stabbing weapons also "Pariser" and "Lungenfuchser". (Pariser meaning "from Paris", France) and Lungenfuchser meaning piercer of lungs. So I think it's more likely that the more civilian people with Degen called their weapons like this..
@@Blutroth : I am native swabian speaker :-)). The ,Pariser' ( Not the current slang one!) was , as far as i know, a weapon only used for duels and studentic ,Mensur' bouts/ Stoßmensur up to 1850s. It had a disk as handguard, no kind of bars ( Bügel/ Spangen). The civilian smallsword, used by upper middleclass, upperclass and important officials, had been carried as sidearm, somewhere i read, that ,romanic' gentlemen allways carried their smallsword, while ,germanic' gentlemen sometimes only carried a stick/ cane. Also i read, that in 1780s France ( ancien regime) elderly gentlemen carried their smallsword more regularly than young gentlemen. When you visit a museum/ castle, have a look on 17th/ 18th century gentlemens canes! Some of them have a similarity to a long mace.
So, where's the cut-off; an inch wide at the base, tapering to a point? That seems like a good place to begin the argument, lol. You reminded me of a fight scene in one of Roger Zelazney's Amber novels; he described the swords used as a wide bladed rapier vs. a narrow broadsword, so that the opponents we're fairly equally matched. At the time I thought in early pulp fiction terms where "broadsword" meant an arming sword. Thanks for the memory jog, and thanks for your great content!
Great stuff! Marginally off-topic, but I was thinking about the nature of cut vs thrust and the social "acceptability" of the two in duel-inclined civilian life. With rapiers being more thrust-oriented and (a lot of) military swords emphasising a broader blade for decent cutting capability, do you think that another factor in the rapier or smallsword's popularity as fashionable civilian swords could be that thrusts were more "noble" or less "savage" in the context of duelling than the visually gruesome wounds of cutting?
This is super interesting. There's a similarity in the modern era with the rise of bare knuckle boxing. Boxing is the sweet science, buuuuut, bkb is seen as barbaric. This is because of the commonly suffered face cuts suffered by the bare knuckle boxers. It looks barbaric rather than sporting like in Queensbury rules boxing.
I've heard that theory too, but it means people had a specific logic back then: we can carry stabbing weapons every day and duel each other in the street because the wounds are small and the sight isn't disgusting, and the fact that a deep stab wound is deadly is an unimportant detail XD
@@benm5913 And that's fascinating too to me, because (and correct if I'm wrong) as far as I'm aware, bare knuckle boxing is generally less dangerous than boxing. With BKB a fighter has to be careful with the force of their punches, knowing that they could shatter their knuckles potentially; whereas conversely, a contemporary boxer has the protection of the gloves, allowing them to hit as hard as possible (and with the added weight of the glove too!)
Warning: unhinged ramble with caveats ahead, reader discretion advised. I suspect it would be more about the perceived primitivity (any peasant can flail, well, a flail around) and physical demands of cut-centric fencing as opposed to precision, nuance and perceived effortlessness of thrust-dominant fencing (judging high level rapier contests without replays is a joke, we should get white jackets and use some paint soaked foam or something on edges lol). The gruesomeness of wounds might've been considered in case both parties survived the duel though, in that case many a young noble would rather die or have a small "scabby" wound than lose an ear, a nose or a hand like it usually happened in saber-duelling cultures. That being said I think these, if existed, would actually be post-facto rationalisations. Italy was the main exporter of culture in renaissance and baroque, and early on that includes the martial one, and had a wealth of competing schools (especially considering the size of the peninsula, not to mention the northern Italy in particular which really led the charge in this regard), and at some point the idea of a guy (Viggiani iirc? Don't quote me on that lol) promoting thrust as the superior form of attack over cut became widely popular (not without merit!) leading to the spread of his methodology*. Simple as. *it was largely caused by italian, or rather bolognese fencing becoming so ridiculously flowery it supposedly started losing its point (pun unintended), and thrusting is the least complex and therefore most mechanically efficient, meaning least tiresome, fastest and probably more importantly least telling way of delivering the iron into opponent's body, especially in sword forward systems (in sword retracted systems it's probably equal but they both give more time for reaction and require more time to bring sword in-line to protect yourself, it's why so many longsword tournament winners lean heavily into longpoint-esque guards)
I never read any hystorical fancing manual, so I'll just refer to what it's common. In Italy nowadays we refer to roughly any thrusting sword or rapier as "stocco"
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the clarification of the rapîer as a civil sword.* The Spanish _espada ropera,_ or dress sword, was a rough pattern for military officers' rapîers throughout Europe, as it was good for slashing as well as thrusting. The Italian martial-arts academies paired a cup-hilt rapîer with a left-hand dagger. French aristocrats and French sword academies collaborated on lighter rapîers, then thrust-only smallswords for duelling before standardizing on a specification for an _épée de combat._ Both broadwswords and rapîers used swept hilts. Basket hilts, overkill for a rapîer blade, were primarily used for back- and broadswords.
i think how the sword in questions feels to use also matters greatly, like you said in your review of the munich townsguard it really does feel more like an arming sword than a rapier, and to me that plays a huge role
agreed! and really a lot of the weapons labelled as "swords" here dont even practically work in the same way rapiers do that i would guess some of the boundaries between the categories were also partially defined by use even thought sources say you can do a lot of the same things with them. i picked up a custom Schiavonna from Kvetun and a lot of my friends have been expecting me to use it in rapier fencing, but i honestly have found it far more applicable in our saber fencing classes. its a bit heavier, broader, and generally cuttier than rapiers that it doesnt feel right to try and use it like i would a rapier.
Based on what I know about German and Italian fencing, you would learn how to thrust with a rapier, cut with another sword and together you'd have a complete cut and thrust fencing method to do both with.
Does schiavona even allow for comfortable thrusting or holding an in-line guard (think destreza or thibault)? The basket looks very similar to a mortuary hilt and they tend to have giant pommels, based on pictures alone I can't imagine doing rapier with one even if it the blade had a steep taper
The schiavona is more appropriately a 'side sword'/function more like a cut and thrust vs a thrusting centric Rapier. The main problem we all seem to be having is we want to name a sword without considering how it would be used. The fact that swords generally were just called 'sword' rather than giving a narrow definition as we like to do today isn't helping us.
I agree with Matt in my country (Croatia was part of Habsburg monarchy or Empire of Austria or however one wants to put it in that period) there was a simple division - sabre (curved blade usually single edge or with sharpened false edge ner thr tip), sword (straight blade usually double edged that can cut and thrust but is wider and “heavier” more fit for cutting blows) and rapier (straight blade usually double edged weather sharpened all the way or just half way down the blade more fit for thrust)
In my "head cannon" there are three sword lengths (short, medium, long) and three bladeforms (cut, cut&thrust, thrust) for swords that can be worn as sidearms (i.e. not greatswords), giving rise to 9 types: Short sword (e.g. gladius) Cutlass (also hangers and short messers) Small sword Broad/back/arming/side sword Saber or scimitar Rapier Longsword Estoc Kriegmesser (big choppy, maybe curved) A lot of the naming differences depend on the level of hand protection (e.g. saver vs scimitar, arming sword vs sidesword, cutlass vs hanger), which is important, and ads yet another dimension (maybe simple cross/ semi-developed/full basket?), potentially giving you 27 types ...
The one thing i have to remember about swords is that its a bit of the 'ship of theseus' thing. They didn't have longswords and then were just "Huh, i wanna make a sword that's 1inch wide at the base, longer and used for thrusting" They were tiny evolutions that happened over dozens and sometimes hundreds of years. Only when a weapon truly becomes the ship of thesius and every part is changed do we look back and say 'this weapon is totally different now, lets give it a new name' So its good to remember the range.
Having been doing research on the 30 Years War period for reenactment purposes, I find it very difficult to differentiate between battlefield and civilian weapons for infantry. Some of the swords worn by soldiers in etchings and paintings from the period REALLY look narrow and long, and in later periods especially this seems to be the case. Whether it’s artistic license or that the sword as a sidearm allowed for more personalization when it came to what was carried by foot soldiers on the field is unclear to me.
From what I've read about practices in German, I think that may be an example of people "Bringing their own from home," if that makes sense. Having very little knowledge on the 30 years war, I believe that it's reasonable that a fair amount of men couldn't afford or otherwise procure a more suitable sword and so went with something rather than nothing. Of course maybe those of types of sword make excellent and handy side arms when it's hit the fan, and it's a deliberate choice!
@@imagine_you_are_a_burger I think it’s reasonable to assume that’s the case. For how detail oriented baroque artists were, I’d be surprised if they “accidentally” depicted the wrong sort of sword.
@@SecundusInfernus multiple explanations could be true. Some might have felt they were better with a thinner blade than with a broader blade. Some probably had no choice. Some probably just thought the thinner blade looked nicer
I read somewhere that in the Spanish army when the empire, that it was frowned upon among soldiers for one to carry a sword for civilian use, from which I deduce that there were those who used rapiers in the army. in my non-expert opinion, it could be related to the excessive flexibility of civilian rapiers
@@lrdkuzco Well, that would make a lot of sense actually. And if true it’s helpful insight, since Spanish Tercio is actually what I plan to begin reenacting soon.
I'm with you, I've never gone in much for the hilt definition, and think blade width far more useful in defining what a sword is and how it would be used.
Hey Matt, I've gotten into knives of history over the last few years and your channel is one of my main go to channels for historical weapons, especially knives! One such knife I found particularly unique is the Iconic SOG Bowie of the Vietnam war. From what I understand the designer based the design off a bowie knife his father used to own. What always stood out to me was the the spine of the blade and its almost "batman-esk" shape. Is there any historical use of this particular shape before the SOG bowie was made? It always seemed like a fairly unique war knife for the era.
In historical reinactment in Italy I've heard the term "striscia" thrown around alongside "spada da lato" which is the translation for "side sword". But I don't know how historically accurate striscia is, the word itself means "strip"
The size of the hand protection (guard) was directly tied to the use of it. So, swords for war had massive hand covers. But, as those used for honor or in-town carry had a small one. In my opinion, swords #1 & #3 are rapiers (roperas = ropa = clothes) to be carried under the long cape. The #2 was just a battle sword, predecessor to the cavalry straight sabre.
I saw the weapon you describe at 6:00 on the weekend in a museum in Dundee (Scotland). I saw it it was massive, so I thought how can a Rapier be that big? Then I looked at the tag and it was called a "Broadsword" which... I dunno seems really wrong to call it that.
Where I live in the US, a lot of us call slip joint pliers Channelocks. This is due to a name brand Channelock that made them . Could this be the case of a sword maker named Rapier, hence his style sword was know as Rapiers. Though I would agree on blade width.
Your theory that the hilt doesn’t matter for the name, “Rapier”, meshes with my observations from the Paulus Hector Mair material. He presents the Rapier in different contexts: Rapier, Rapier & Dagger, Rapier & Buckler. However, generally speaking the hilts are different matching the off-hand tool. Fully ornate hilt with solo Rapier seems predominant, while with the dagger, often more side-sword (transitional) looking, and with buckler, more of what I’d normally refer to as an Arming sword. I should dig deeper and get some actual numbers on it, but when trying these combinations of weapons, it makes sense. Try using a buckler with a complex-hilted Rapier - kind of awkward and a bit redundant. To some extent it makes sense - I watched the video where you read the story wherein the rapier and dagger seemed to be replacing sword and buckler in England that the same may be happening in the HRE, so there would be a bias for the pairings based on the style of the day, but that style shift was likely driven by functionality, so… interesting that PHM called what I’d normally refer to as, Rapier, Side-sword, and Arming-sword, all Rapiers. And that in the 1530-40 time range all three were presented and have different hilt configuration tendencies, seemingly biased by the paired weapon… 🤔
Maybe rapiers became popular because dueling in the street without prior arrangement became popular at that time? Maybe in the Middle Ages a nobleman didn't have to carry a sword with him all the time, because if he had a conflict with someone, they agreed to meet tomorrow and have a sword duel. And then the duels suddenly started coming without any preparation and you had to have a lighter weapon to carry everyday? I don't know, that's my guess. Another reason could be the development of the wealthy bourgeoisie. Such people did not have a typical war sword at all, because they did not fight in wars, but they might have a need for a duel, so special dueling weapons were developed...? With this hand protection, it's a bit of a paradoxical thing, because you see: in Poland, the nobility had light sabers to wear with elegant clothes and heavy combat sabers. But these light, "elegant" sabers had no hand protection. This is the opposite of rapier.
I don't think (and I may be wrong here) there was much duelling in the Middle Ages. Tournaments had melees and jousting. I'm not aware of duelling being a thing there.
Rapiers are not that light. At least as heavy an earlier cross hilt one hand swords. There balance is considerably more in the hilt, though the blade is longer, so they were not easier to wear.
LOL about dress swords an Old Professor I once had talked about his rancher Grandfather who carried a plain blue steel revolver day to day but had a smaller nickel plated one with pearl grips as his dress gun (Texas circa 1890)
8:44 - A minor thing but that's not correct. In Italian a rapier is called "striscia", not "spada". The word "stocco" is also used for both rapiers and estocs. The word "spada" means sword in its most general sense and doesn't hold any information about it except the fact that it's a sword so it would be used in general when you don't care about details, or when it's clear what you're talking about. They were using the term "spada" in treatises because there's was no confusion about the type of sword they were using.
We really need to talk. I have a very very old Spanish heavy Calvary rapier, modified over time by a serious badass with a skull pommel. Full length with a square blade. An armour piercing beast on horseback. Help please. My grandfather's most expensive acquisition I want to sell after 60 years... Toledo Museum valued it at 15k.
I've read somewhere, that especially during the 30 years war, they used both broader swords as well as rapiers on the battlefield, but rapiers actually were used more by civilians fighting as conscripts or in mercenary groups. While the military preferred broader swords that were capable of parrying polearms and two handed weapons. Also, while a thrust to certain parts of the body causes horrific wounds with internal bleeding, thrusts to non critical body parts often times do not stop an attacking opponent. While powerful cuts to pretty much any part of the body will probably stop an immediate attack. So i think considering a battlefield where it is enough to disable someone and prevent him from participating in the fight, rather than the need to kill, cutting swords were probably just the better weapon.
There are metaphors in English that make it pretty clear what the Average Brit in the Street thought a rapier was: "rapier thin" and "rapier wit". Pretty obvious from those that rapiers were thought of as thin, quick, and precise. Re, longswords being for battle: does this mean that, when in Romeo and Juliet Capulet says "Give me my long sword", Shakespeare was trying to get across "this is no longer a duel, this means WAR"?
I remember as a child, I would have been about 10 years old, looking in the window of an antique dealer and seeing two 'rapiers' but their blades were triangular in section. My surprise at seeing this is the only reason I remember this as I had assumed all swords used a typical flat blade. The place I saw this was Rochester, Kent which was where I lived at the time and the date would have been about 1955. Are there any historical records of rapiers with triangular section blades?
My question is. What was that last sword you were holding? I would love to Find out the maker. To me that is an amazingly beautiful blade and would love to find one like it!
When history channel's deadliest warrior show had an Espada Ropera featured on an episode, they cleanly sliced a hanging pig in half with ease, with a "thrusting" sword, lol. The guy swinging it told them, it's not that straight blades can't cut like a curved blade, it's that people don't know how to cut with a straight blade (not a quote, gist of his comments to the host). That changed my perspective on how I used a rapier as well as my respect for the Espada Ropera.
In addition to a rapier blade being *slender* (as opposed to a wide), I think it must also be *straight,* so no curved rapiers! To classify it more precisely, would you say the blade: [1] is pointed (or can it also be rounded)? [2] is double edged (or can it also be single edged)? [3] has no distal taper (i.e. constant thickness)? [4] has no width taper (i.e. constant width)? Also, what about the blade cross-section? Doesn't this usually vary according to intended usage and hence classification?
I shall speak for French only because I am French: in the French language “rapière” has become a synonym for sword for quite a lot of people; it’s some kind of slang word. As a result, the word appears in XIXth century newspapers or novels whatever the actual weapon considered actually is. I think it got popularised by the cloak and dagger fad. As a result, when you encounter the word “rapière”, always identify the context, notably the context of the person using the word to establish whether or not he or she is a knowledgeable person dedicated to precisely identifying the weapon.
One thing I've never quite understood the rationale for is the benefit of a double edged blade on a complex hilt that inherently orientates that blade. Is there some use to the lower two thirds of the false edge I'm overlooking?
Thank you for making this, always wonder how narrow should a sword's blade gets to be call a rapier and how broad a rapier's blade should be to be call a sword
I think length would play a role for some people at the time as far as use is concerned. There are some techniques that necessitate having a blade quite a bit longer than your arm.
In Portugal, we have the rapier as the florete for fencing. Don´t know the history about rapiers around here but my knowlwdge of fencing florete ain´t the same as you call rapier. We have the (estoque that we translate to rapier) but the hand guard ain´t so elaborated as a common rapier
I 100% agree with your logic and your conclusions, and we should ignore the fringe weapons that vary from any norm. I was a junior fencing champ, long before I studied bushido and long before I carried a ceremonial side arm. So I take an interest across the board. I've always considered/understood a "rapier" to be removed from any kind of military combat. They're a tactical, 1-2-1 dueling weapon; a gentleman's costume denoting bravado or a nod to their military experience. Louis 14th, for a few months one time he banned men from carrying rapiers, amended that to "swords" (interesting) because too many nobles were killing each other in drunken challenges to duel 😂.
Also, “épée” in French and “spada” in Italian are connected and have the same origin. Same for the German “Spaten”, though that now means “shovel” instead of “spade” (“Schwert” in modern German).
Totally unrelated to the topic of this video, but I've been wondering: what purpose did the "knuckle chain" on certain Polish/Eastern European sabres serve? Was it completely ornamental? Because I can't picture it offering any real hand protection like a knuckle bow would.
Matt, it might be interesting to explore the origin of this dichotomy in what the early 16th century? At what point and why did civilians adopt a narrower sword, and did this dichotomy lead on to a difference in sword techniques for civilian duels versus war?
Researching to write books can be so informative my MC uses a Side-sword which as I understand is a style of rapier with a broader blade so videos like this help a tonne (edit) just got to the part about the side-sword and well damn I guess you learn something new everyday so the term side-sword is a more modern invention, definitely a lot of conflicting info about the names and types of different swords online but I know I want my MC to have a cutting and thrusting style sword so I shall continue researching
Great vid, very interesting. What you said. We do like to over complicate things based on occasional outliers and the pedantic nature of dedicated historians. Thinner, longer, thrust centric is what we and historically they mean (t).
I am American and was talking to a friend from Canada about the 2nd amendment and how we have to take into context the Era it was written in. Is there a chance you could talk about the periods where weapons were commonly carried and what the weapons culture was like from the 1600-1800s?
You didn't mention balance points. My shallow knowledge puts the balance point of a thrusting sword closer to the hand but closer to the tip for a cutting sword.
right, apparently the confusing usage of the term 'rapier' for smallsword (and/or for fleuret) seems to be original, and making the distinction between these thrust-centric weapons is novel. One did evolve from the other, so its not too strange that the term stuck. I recently found (online) an official yugoslavian ministry of army fencing treatise from 1940, which I found interesting given the late date for something fencing related to have an official military connection and apparently being taught at a military academy -- and its titled, when translated, "manual for fighting with sabre and rapier", and that's a reprint from a treatise from 1933. Explains the term fleuret as a synonym, but generally uses 'rapier'. And I'm sure this terminology was not novel then, given its anachronism.
I've often wondered: Who the hell was the brave soul who first decided to call the rapier arms race off and wear a shorter one? It's just occurred to me: Perhaps someone who was very good at fencing. Being high status others then followed suit. (Look how cool I am! I don't need a very long rapier!) Or perhaps it was just someone high status like ~Mercutio~ the Prince of Wales and others followed the fashion. Or maybe it was just someone who didn't actually expect to use it and wanted the convenience of a shorter sword.
I agree as to the width determines the difference. Basically in my opinion if a blades cut could reasonably sever a hand by cutting thru the bone it would be a sword while a rapier would be only useful in cutting flesh. In other words a rapier can cut while a sword would also be able to cleave similar to a kitchen knife vs a meat cleaver.
And to make things even trickier, what about the Spanish Conquistador swords? Some of those have fullered blades that are clearly wider then the average rapier, but narrower then the typical sidesword. And to add insult to injury, they often have hilts that are less complex then the usual rapier hilts, despite being fairly long, and possibly more thrust then cut oriented? How would we classify those? And how did the Spanish classify them at the time if they did?
is there any dissenting information? im also surprised about sideswords not being a contemporary term as (and i know it is a different language lol) i thought spada de latto was in usage. in your previous video on shakespeare stabbings one of the incidents mentions a longsword, would it be safe to assume then that this case was talking about a longsword? furthermore how exclusive is the term rapier to being just a narrow thrusting sword, i couldve sworn you have some videos stating that the swepthilt sidesword you have couldve been called a rapier and if im not mistaken doesnt joachim meyer call a similar such sword a rapier (agin i know thatd be a different language but nonetheless it might maybe could bear some parsel of relevance in elizabethan era english)
It kind of feels like the perception of what defined a rapier became more of a generic term for sword in a sporting sense as sport fencing became more of the purpose than self defense.
Could I request a video on the british weapons of the 18th century (meaning personal arms, such as swords, daggers, pistols, and muskets, rather than artillery and polearms)?
About not wearing swords even in places where you had no legal restrictions in the middle ages, I'm wondering if there was some social stigma... Kinda like in the states in the USA where you can open carry firearms but it just doesn't looks right at all.
It's not just social stigma in this regard but also safety. Assaults are generally conducted from an ambush, and a gun draws attention to the carrier as potential danger to be eliminated first. It can also make you a target for a gun, many career criminals learn to steal holstered guns (I'm sure you've seen some videos or news about exactly this happening to a cop, including some fairly gruesome clips where said cop ends up being executed. And cops are a prime target because they carry the gun outside of the fighting angle, that is at the back and out of their sight and immediate reach). Anyway I totally see this to have been the case, we know for example that having a large all-purpose knife in many more developed states all the way back in 1830s wasn't particularly well seen (I suspect especially in cities), Matt even quoted a source from mid 1800s in one of his bowie videos
In Spain, any sword for civilian use and a straight blade was called a rapier. however, the word rapier is often accompanied by a type specification such as lace, cut and point or just point (for stabbing only), cup-hilted, puntilla, etc.
There are examples of cup-hilted rapiers with slightly wide blades, which could be taken as the perfect example of a rapier, but they are called "swords" just because they are not intended for civilian use.
At around 6 minutes the discussion of the differences between the rapier and the broadsword remind me so much of the final duel in the 1995 "Rob Roy" movie. You may mention this but I paused to post ;)
I would be interested in battlefield accounts from the 16th and 17th century where "rapiers" were used. I always found it fascinating that the last generation of calvary swords (20th century) were long narrow thrusting blades in many cases. I've often wondered about the battlefield durability of rapiers and weather that was the biggest reason most military swords had wider blades. I have a notion that the cutting blade was more effective in quickly incapacitating an enemy in the age of firearms, where if stabbed, an enemy could still pull a trigger.
For me, as a spaniard, this is 'espada ropera' (rapier sword). Literally a sword that is worn with clothes, the clothes to go around the city or town. And as a 'Verdadera Destreza' student, we would make a distinction between early rapiers and late rapiers. Greetings from the Academia Da Espada (A Coruña), Spain.
I thought te translation was more "A dressed up sword"
Espada means spade or a stright double edged sword/blade.
Ropera is cloths from ropa meaning clothing.
So literally clothing/dress sword.
Dress sword adapted from Bilbo sword that originated Basque city of Bilbao/ Bilbo in english.
These very short swords or long daggers depending on perspective were common place among sailors, pirates & criminal though out the old & new world.
If a pirate didn't use a cutlass/ hanger they used a Bilbo that got fancy with a bit more length as the fashion called a dress sword.
I have sperate comment going into far more general detail.
@@arnijulian6241 the translation for 'espada' is simply sword. any sword
It is Spaniard
What about Conquistadores? What is the name of their sword? They would not use rapier in a war right?
I'm reminded of something Ian from Forgotten Weapons said in a video on the difference between SMG and PDW. People make weapons to fit their needs, not to be categorised so there will always be grey areas.
Elegantly put, things can fit multiple rolls and purposes. Imagine if people psychically communicated and didn't have to worry about using the right words. No argument over with something's called just seeing what's in there mind.
That's a good example. Two select-fire weapons in the same exact caliber with slightly different configurations could have very different intended purposes. Even the same base firearm in different configurations could serve different roles. The Uzi and MP5 come to mind.
When you say Ian, everyone here knows you're talking about Gun Jesus 😆
@@DrVictorVasconcelos : A person watching both Matt and Ian is wellinformed about handweapons.
Maybe, but consider how we are today--we very much classify almost everything. Who's to say they didn't have their own classification that we just don't understand?
That is one hell of a beautiful rapier that you are holding sir.
To think, until I found this channel, I was pretty much just a longsword and katana fan.
Now, I'm a fan of all sorts of swords...
Anyway, it does explain why rapier descriptions seemed to vary.
In Swedish we have the historical name värja and it is really the type of hilt that defines it; a hilt with fingerrings and some hand protection unlike earlier swords with cross guard hilt and later swords with sabre hilts. So both a rapier and a side sword is a värja; but a stötvärja (Thrusting värja) is a rapier and huggvärja (Cutting värja) is a cut and thrust side sword. That's why the Swedish m.93 cavalry sword Matt has is called a sabre in Swedish; because it has a sabre hilt even thou it has a straight blade. The hilt decides the name.
antog hette huggare enbart...kortsvärdset används av flottan framförallt...sabel mera kavellerist endast...
God aftonbladet
Yeah, and not all sabers are curved. Many are straight.
If you pay close attention you'll notice he does the entire video on one breath!
I love the excitement and detailed knowledge in this video!
For this type of weird scenarios actually spanish started using the term "ropera" in the late 17th century, until then in many manuscripts you will see that they call them simply "espada", which means sword. Later on comes the term ropera to differentiate a civillian purpose sword from a war oriented one, like the side sword that appears in 10:05, they started using again a term which was written in the "Quijote", that term being "espada tajadora" that would translate as slashing sword or slasher in english. So... You could say that a rapier is just a blade that is being carried as part of your outfit, like a hat, a cape etc.
Ah. Ropera. Like 'Ropa,' ie, clothes..I get it. Is that the etymology, or its equivalent in French, of the word, 'rapier,' then?
@@n.w.1803 It was the equivalent, they just took it and literally pronounce it using their phonetic rules. Same would happen with the term "gentil hombre" and 'gentleman'
Thanks for the explanation. I feel that in spanish we have SO FEWER words to differentiate things than in english; that this "Ropera" thing is really our little exception, haha.
@@defaultytuser Don't feel bad. Modern English contains literally about twice as many words as any other language. At least we don't have to learn 10,000 Chinese characters...well, not yet..
@@n.w.1803 hahaha stole the words from my mouth ... "not yet"
That "longsword?" With the swept hilt at the end is absolutely gorgeous
'The gentleman was armed with a pistol.' That phrase in a newspaper would indicate totally different pistols in 1810, 1870, 1920 and 2024. But at the time it would have been clear what they were to the readers of that newspaper. We tend to lump hundreds of years in the middle ages and later on together, thinking that the people at the time had no idea of the state-of-the-art of their contempory side arm technology.
I often think about the weapon divisions in Meyer, between schwert (sword, what we'd call a longsword), dussack (basically saber), and rappier (rapier, which we'd today call sidesword). I think it's interesting how, in-period, they had words for various types of sword, but they did usually also have "sword" swords, which could mean anything from an arming sword to a longsword to a rapier depending on where and when you asked.
And for some reason, Japanese swords are always called, "swords" by speakers of European languages, despite the fact that a single-edged, slightly curved blade might more properly be called a sabre, or even something like the kriegsmesser (they have a similar sort of construction)...come to think of it, I actually have a book of weaponry from the mid-late 1800s that refers to the "sabres" of the "samourai." But that was a book that payed more attention to aesthetics and ornament than to the functional aspects of the weapons..
@@n.w.1803 Well, in Polish both messer and katana are in sabre category.
@@jozefkozon4520 Really? My Polish ancestry must've tipped me off.
In what an archaeologist might term "systematics" this "sword" sword vs. various kinds, is a class vs type question. One reason there is so much confusion is because there are so many distinct ideas about how one differentiated members of the class. I grew up considering rapiers were swords with long, narrow blades. I "logically" concluded, still being in grade school, that "broadswords" were just swords with wider blades than rapiers. it wasn't until I was in high school that I achieved the degree of confusion we enjoy at present.
I would love to see a video on the oddest combinations of blades with hilts that you have come across. I know you have shown military sabers where the soldier will keep the regulation hilt but use a different blade to stay somewhat in regulation but as you mentioned the sidesword's hilt could be placed on any number of blade styles... what are some of the head scratchers that you have come across?
As a German these classifications are particularly interesting, because historically we lumped rapier, small swords, foils and I think even spadroons together under the term "Degen" which is so broad I find it completely useless 😂
But I'm not sure in what aspects Germany differed from the rest of Europe here. I think that in the 19th century with all these horrible "fencing" fraternities all new terms (and objects?) like "Korbschläger" (basket beater) were introduced that didn't really help either 😅
well, at least some of the Degen could be differentiated by the lovely term Haudegen ... if you actually applied that to a sword rather than a person xD
These two aren't related, though. Meaning "hero" it's a Germanic term found as early as the 9th ct., I believe (thegan), but meaning a kind of weapon it appears to be a 14th century loan from French and the etymological counterpart of "dagger" (it's not quite clear what exactly these early occurances of the word denoted, the known use was obviously later, when rapiers etc. were around).
This particular phenomenon in German has led to a conundrum in the study of the great composer J.S. Bach... at least for me😅! In about 1705, while working in the small town of Arnstadt, Bach got into a fairly heated scuffle with another musician (a bassoonist to be exact), and it's well documented that Bach drew some sort of blade to defend himself. However, due to this extremely broad German term, Degen, I have never been able to ascertain exactly what type of weapon Johann Sebastien pulled on this guy! Some sources say "dagger", while others say "sword", and the renowned Bach scholar John Elliott Gardiner says "rapier"! So, I've never been able to figure out if Bach was just wearing a smallsword, which were certainly popular among German court employees of that period, or if he was carrying some manner of actual dagger, which in a sense, I would find to be more interesting.
By the way, there is also a type of very long dagger/shortish sword that emerged in late medieval Switzerland that was sort of a continuation of the Basilard, and it was called the Degen. They had hilts somewhat like the "Swiss daggers" or "Holbein daggers" worn by German military officers during WW2, but had VERY long blades (sometimes two ft.!). I wonder if this weapon could be the earliest usage of the term Degen that you were referencing...
@@andreweden9405 regarding bach, i vote for a small sword or some kind of dagger. i don't think geyersbach would have attacked him with a stick if he was wearing a full-length rapier!?
I always think of the word, "Degen," as I do an older Norse word, "Mækir". If it's too long to be a dolch but neither schwert nor messer then it must be a degen. Clear as mud, as they say.
I love the English language trying to have an individual name for everything and the French and Spanish just happy with the one word fits all approach
French language has been stagnating for a while, because the French government has power to regulate the language itself (sounds like total nonsense to me.)
@@wserthmar8908 it doesn't, it (or rather the language council, which most countries/languages have) has the right to regulate the standardised, official form of it, that is what you learn at school, use in documents and formal settings
@@Sk0lzky, thanks for the information
@@Sk0lzky That seems like a difference only in semantics. And no, it's basically only French that has such a thing. In fact basically every French-speaking country has their own separate one, that's how much of a French thing it is.
@@Sk0lzky if they have the power to regulate the standard official version of the language... That is the govt having the power to regulate the language, so the other guy wasnt wrong.
In czech it is even more confusing, because 'kord' (possibly from latin chorda - string) means rapier and 'rapír' means smallsword. Furthermore I believe that forms of messer were still quite prevalent, filling the niche of cut and trust sword for the millitary and lower clases. But in english your argument hulds up well.
I've always interpreted the simple use of "sword" to suggest it's referring to types of sword that are historically well established, and what the average person, and culture is most familiar with. So to determine what is being referred to by "sword", you can probably just look at the recent prior generations of sword and find the commonalities between them; and to determine what they mean by the more specific "rapier", look for what are the newer kinds of sword (perhaps particularly for what's been imported) and look for the common traits of those swords
Like how a TV nowadays is most likely a flatscreen OLED of quite the size with a remote, but even 40 years back it would have meant a relatively small CRT with the controls on the set that most likely could display colour.
@@dr.krimson1010 We feel the need to specify when it's different from what people might assume. Like in the future, (assuming things continue as they're going), nobody's going to feel the need to say "I have an electric car", because it will be assumed that every car is electric. Right now, people specify because they're not the norm
Sword is just a generic taxonomy like vehicle or radio. It could mean a bicycle or a walkie-talkie as easily as it could an SUV or a modem or a boat or an airplane or a kick scooter or a police scanner or a CB or a HAM or even one of those consoles you listen to music on or a Sony Walkman.
And don't write off internal combustion just yet! Making batteries for cars generates as much CO2 as if you drove around an old Lincoln Towne Car for 15ish years. We'd all be using hydrogen fuel cells except it takes more energy to produce the stuff from electrolysis than it generates when you turn it back into water-at least right now. Whether it's hydrogen or some sort of ethanol-based biofuel, time will tell. The race is on.
idk if it’s incorrect, its just the common situation of “word in the sense of _” where the context is the key. like if i say pass the dijon, i mean in the sense of the mustard, not the actual place. meaning “the mustard in the dijon style”. or (neck)tie vs tie (a knot). a word can have multiple senses depending on how, when, and why its employeed.
its just important to recognize them and when it’s appropriate to use them. like when you are dealing with classifications, it becomes useful to distinguish a rapier from a small sword. but maybe in a story someone uses “rapier” to describe a foil, since the intent is to get across “a thrusting item” rather then distinguishing blade types more specifically.
The word "ropera" is very rare in 16th-17th century Spanish sources, in my experience, although I haven't researched it extensively. They mostly use "espada". I think the term fell out of use in Spanish as soon as the 15th century, interestingly enough, just as the term was spreading abroad. It only resurfaces in 19th century museum catalogues, probably influenced by the continued use in French and English sources.
In the modern day, Espada just means sword in spanish.
Your experience is quite correct
@@VonRibbitt The same as back then
Matt, thank you for all you do with all of this all the time. You are greatly appreciated by this yank across the pond. Thank you.
That was really interesting. I've noticed in the very detailed paintings of Vrancx and Sneyer, covering the Thirty Years War, lots of long, straight bladed complex hilted weapons being carried and used so I think you've hit the nail on the head (in my humble opinion) on the sword / rapier description and difference. Incidentally, I think I own the rapier shown at 07:03 - which has a triangular blade section.
I do love finger rings, even a finger over a cross hilt I love the feel but obviously worried about loosing that finger
Excellent video, as always! That’s sound analysis and context is key. Thanks so much.
One factor in the distinction has to do with the style of the weapon wielder's hat and the ammount and kind of feathers on that hat.
Hi. Very nice presentation. And I think your are correct.
I will preface by stating that I am french and NOT a specialist or scholar in the matter.
From my understanding, in France, the "rapière" comes from Spain. As you said.
It is an "épée", straight blade with double edge, but the blade is long and narrow, so it is nimble and thrust oriented. More suited for civilian use/duel, I don't think it was ever considered for war.
AND it must have an ornate full or half basket hand guard.
Your beautiful antique is one. The nice replica is not, the blade is too broad and the edge are not "parrallele", it looks like a battle/war sword.
Cheers.
PS: it is kind of funny, a single edge curved blade is a "sabre" in Fance, not a "broad sword", wich translate as "épée large" and doesn't exist in french.
Can you do a History of the Rapier video? I'm curious as to where it came from, how did it catch on, what part did it play in life and it's final iterations, and maybe future ideas.
Great work! Thanks for making swords so fun!
Interestingly, I'm learning about Bronze Age Britain, and there are swords from the middle bronze age called 'rapiers' since they're for stabbinge. The early ones seem a lot more like extremely long daggers to me but I suppose it makes sense they're called rapiers since over time they gain more of a cutting edge and evolve into proper bronze swords.
IMO whatever archeologist decided to muddy the waters by refering to those bronze age swords by a word invented in the 16th C has a lot to answer for.
@@trikepilot101 Yeah you're probably right! It's a bit wierd but it makes some sense since they're thrusting swords.
@@trikepilot101 I haven't made a very extensive study on those blades, but the earliest writing I recall seeing that term used in for them was Oakshott's "Archeology of Weapons".
The preferable form of a blade depends on your fencing style! So the rapier was the weapon of choice if you preferred the way faster thrusting technics. On horseback the weapon of choice was a cutting blade, which made sabers a typical cavalry weapon.
In Germany a rapier was often called a "Raufdegen" or "spanish raufdegen". "Degen" is synonymous for all straight blades in contrary to the sabre with a curved blade.
This is a classic scholagladiatoria video Absolutely brilliant
My Windlass 'Agincourt' sword is interesting to compare to the rapier; being a blade clearly designed more to the thrust (probably by half-swording) but with some genuine cutting ability and an overall configuration more like a hand=and-half arming sword (including only the classic T quillon).
I didn't know these things about rapiers and the different types of them! Very informative!
Does anyone know what the swrod at the 10:00 minute mark is? Opening its classification I mean specifically. It's very cool and I want one LOL 😄 - also if you know anything about its quality... Or a recommendation for something very similar with better quality I would love to know.
Fun Fact: In german the term rapier was not used before the term for the smallsword (Degen). So sometimes if someone is talking about a Rapier, he can actually mean a smallsword/historic epee. "Stoßdegen" means thrusting epee, which was a common name for rapiers in german speaking countries.
There is no german word for smallswords. Hofdegen, Promenierdegen, Kavaliersdegen, Zierdegen ...
@@brittakriep2938 That's not the general word for it, that only describes a special kind of smallsword worn at court. Smallswords were also civilian weapons, i can't imagine the average civilian gentleman called his Degen a Hofdegen...
@@Blutroth : I am Brittas boyfriend, no real expert in historic weapons. I only know Degen as german word for smallswords , spadroons, sideswords, rapiers, fencing epee, duelling epee and in widest view also heavy cavallry sword ( Pallasch). This means weapons mostly used for stabbing. But i don' t really know a german word, which describes exactly and only a civilian smallsword. In novels or nonmilitary museums you can find the noted words, but, as you surely know, novel writers or museum staff often have no real knowledge about weapons.
And the civilian smallsword, used by high and low noblemen, rich nonnobles ( Patrizier or british ,gentry'), may be men of upper middleclass or high/ important officials was not only used as a weapon, but was also a sign for status and authority.
And : As a person with Asperger disorder it is not so easy, to explain, what i think.
@@brittakriep2938 Thanks for your answer...im a native German speaker..just find it unrealistic that they called them all Hofdegen. In the 18th century they called a lot of duelling stabbing weapons also "Pariser" and "Lungenfuchser". (Pariser meaning "from Paris", France) and Lungenfuchser meaning piercer of lungs. So I think it's more likely that the more civilian people with Degen called their weapons like this..
@@Blutroth : I am native swabian speaker :-)). The ,Pariser' ( Not the current slang one!) was , as far as i know, a weapon only used for duels and studentic ,Mensur' bouts/ Stoßmensur up to 1850s. It had a disk as handguard, no kind of bars ( Bügel/ Spangen). The civilian smallsword, used by upper middleclass, upperclass and important officials, had been carried as sidearm, somewhere i read, that ,romanic' gentlemen allways carried their smallsword, while ,germanic' gentlemen sometimes only carried a stick/ cane. Also i read, that in 1780s France ( ancien regime) elderly gentlemen carried their smallsword more regularly than young gentlemen. When you visit a museum/ castle, have a look on 17th/ 18th century gentlemens canes! Some of them have a similarity to a long mace.
Been waiting for this! Thanks Matt 🙌🏼
So, where's the cut-off; an inch wide at the base, tapering to a point? That seems like a good place to begin the argument, lol.
You reminded me of a fight scene in one of Roger Zelazney's Amber novels; he described the swords used as a wide bladed rapier vs. a narrow broadsword, so that the opponents we're fairly equally matched. At the time I thought in early pulp fiction terms where "broadsword" meant an arming sword. Thanks for the memory jog, and thanks for your great content!
Great stuff! Marginally off-topic, but I was thinking about the nature of cut vs thrust and the social "acceptability" of the two in duel-inclined civilian life. With rapiers being more thrust-oriented and (a lot of) military swords emphasising a broader blade for decent cutting capability, do you think that another factor in the rapier or smallsword's popularity as fashionable civilian swords could be that thrusts were more "noble" or less "savage" in the context of duelling than the visually gruesome wounds of cutting?
This is super interesting. There's a similarity in the modern era with the rise of bare knuckle boxing. Boxing is the sweet science, buuuuut, bkb is seen as barbaric. This is because of the commonly suffered face cuts suffered by the bare knuckle boxers. It looks barbaric rather than sporting like in Queensbury rules boxing.
I've heard that theory too, but it means people had a specific logic back then: we can carry stabbing weapons every day and duel each other in the street because the wounds are small and the sight isn't disgusting, and the fact that a deep stab wound is deadly is an unimportant detail XD
@@odoakerx5260 I would 100% believe it. People are more aesthetically driven than we like to admit.
@@benm5913 And that's fascinating too to me, because (and correct if I'm wrong) as far as I'm aware, bare knuckle boxing is generally less dangerous than boxing. With BKB a fighter has to be careful with the force of their punches, knowing that they could shatter their knuckles potentially; whereas conversely, a contemporary boxer has the protection of the gloves, allowing them to hit as hard as possible (and with the added weight of the glove too!)
Warning: unhinged ramble with caveats ahead, reader discretion advised.
I suspect it would be more about the perceived primitivity (any peasant can flail, well, a flail around) and physical demands of cut-centric fencing as opposed to precision, nuance and perceived effortlessness of thrust-dominant fencing (judging high level rapier contests without replays is a joke, we should get white jackets and use some paint soaked foam or something on edges lol).
The gruesomeness of wounds might've been considered in case both parties survived the duel though, in that case many a young noble would rather die or have a small "scabby" wound than lose an ear, a nose or a hand like it usually happened in saber-duelling cultures.
That being said I think these, if existed, would actually be post-facto rationalisations. Italy was the main exporter of culture in renaissance and baroque, and early on that includes the martial one, and had a wealth of competing schools (especially considering the size of the peninsula, not to mention the northern Italy in particular which really led the charge in this regard), and at some point the idea of a guy (Viggiani iirc? Don't quote me on that lol) promoting thrust as the superior form of attack over cut became widely popular (not without merit!) leading to the spread of his methodology*. Simple as.
*it was largely caused by italian, or rather bolognese fencing becoming so ridiculously flowery it supposedly started losing its point (pun unintended), and thrusting is the least complex and therefore most mechanically efficient, meaning least tiresome, fastest and probably more importantly least telling way of delivering the iron into opponent's body, especially in sword forward systems (in sword retracted systems it's probably equal but they both give more time for reaction and require more time to bring sword in-line to protect yourself, it's why so many longsword tournament winners lean heavily into longpoint-esque guards)
I never read any hystorical fancing manual, so I'll just refer to what it's common. In Italy nowadays we refer to roughly any thrusting sword or rapier as "stocco"
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the clarification of the rapîer as a civil sword.* The Spanish _espada ropera,_ or dress sword, was a rough pattern for military officers' rapîers throughout Europe, as it was good for slashing as well as thrusting. The Italian martial-arts academies paired a cup-hilt rapîer with a left-hand dagger. French aristocrats and French sword academies collaborated on lighter rapîers, then thrust-only smallswords for duelling before standardizing on a specification for an _épée de combat._
Both broadwswords and rapîers used swept hilts. Basket hilts, overkill for a rapîer blade, were primarily used for back- and broadswords.
i think how the sword in questions feels to use also matters greatly, like you said in your review of the munich townsguard it really does feel more like an arming sword than a rapier, and to me that plays a huge role
agreed! and really a lot of the weapons labelled as "swords" here dont even practically work in the same way rapiers do that i would guess some of the boundaries between the categories were also partially defined by use even thought sources say you can do a lot of the same things with them. i picked up a custom Schiavonna from Kvetun and a lot of my friends have been expecting me to use it in rapier fencing, but i honestly have found it far more applicable in our saber fencing classes. its a bit heavier, broader, and generally cuttier than rapiers that it doesnt feel right to try and use it like i would a rapier.
Based on what I know about German and Italian fencing, you would learn how to thrust with a rapier, cut with another sword and together you'd have a complete cut and thrust fencing method to do both with.
Does schiavona even allow for comfortable thrusting or holding an in-line guard (think destreza or thibault)? The basket looks very similar to a mortuary hilt and they tend to have giant pommels, based on pictures alone I can't imagine doing rapier with one even if it the blade had a steep taper
The schiavona is more appropriately a 'side sword'/function more like a cut and thrust vs a thrusting centric Rapier. The main problem we all seem to be having is we want to name a sword without considering how it would be used. The fact that swords generally were just called 'sword' rather than giving a narrow definition as we like to do today isn't helping us.
@@Sk0lzky I wouldn't expect it to. It's a basket hilted sword with a cross guard you can hold in all the ways you can hold a rapier.
Thanks for doing this video, Matt! I had been confused by this for some time.
I agree with Matt in my country (Croatia was part of Habsburg monarchy or Empire of Austria or however one wants to put it in that period) there was a simple division - sabre (curved blade usually single edge or with sharpened false edge ner thr tip), sword (straight blade usually double edged that can cut and thrust but is wider and “heavier” more fit for cutting blows) and rapier (straight blade usually double edged weather sharpened all the way or just half way down the blade more fit for thrust)
I love the show Lockwood & Co mainly because it gives us people routinely carrying a rapier in a modern setting. Such a cool look...
Thank you for sharing & I hope this video educates people more on different types of swords ⚔️
In my "head cannon" there are three sword lengths (short, medium, long) and three bladeforms (cut, cut&thrust, thrust) for swords that can be worn as sidearms (i.e. not greatswords), giving rise to 9 types:
Short sword (e.g. gladius)
Cutlass (also hangers and short messers)
Small sword
Broad/back/arming/side sword
Saber or scimitar
Rapier
Longsword
Estoc
Kriegmesser (big choppy, maybe curved)
A lot of the naming differences depend on the level of hand protection (e.g. saver vs scimitar, arming sword vs sidesword, cutlass vs hanger), which is important, and ads yet another dimension (maybe simple cross/ semi-developed/full basket?), potentially giving you 27 types ...
The one thing i have to remember about swords is that its a bit of the 'ship of theseus' thing. They didn't have longswords and then were just "Huh, i wanna make a sword that's 1inch wide at the base, longer and used for thrusting" They were tiny evolutions that happened over dozens and sometimes hundreds of years. Only when a weapon truly becomes the ship of thesius and every part is changed do we look back and say 'this weapon is totally different now, lets give it a new name' So its good to remember the range.
As always there was a lot of good information here. Thank you for all this free knowledge!
Having been doing research on the 30 Years War period for reenactment purposes, I find it very difficult to differentiate between battlefield and civilian weapons for infantry. Some of the swords worn by soldiers in etchings and paintings from the period REALLY look narrow and long, and in later periods especially this seems to be the case. Whether it’s artistic license or that the sword as a sidearm allowed for more personalization when it came to what was carried by foot soldiers on the field is unclear to me.
From what I've read about practices in German, I think that may be an example of people "Bringing their own from home," if that makes sense.
Having very little knowledge on the 30 years war, I believe that it's reasonable that a fair amount of men couldn't afford or otherwise procure a more suitable sword and so went with something rather than nothing.
Of course maybe those of types of sword make excellent and handy side arms when it's hit the fan, and it's a deliberate choice!
@@imagine_you_are_a_burger I think it’s reasonable to assume that’s the case. For how detail oriented baroque artists were, I’d be surprised if they “accidentally” depicted the wrong sort of sword.
@@SecundusInfernus multiple explanations could be true. Some might have felt they were better with a thinner blade than with a broader blade. Some probably had no choice. Some probably just thought the thinner blade looked nicer
I read somewhere that in the Spanish army when the empire, that it was frowned upon among soldiers for one to carry a sword for civilian use, from which I deduce that there were those who used rapiers in the army.
in my non-expert opinion, it could be related to the excessive flexibility of civilian rapiers
@@lrdkuzco Well, that would make a lot of sense actually. And if true it’s helpful insight, since Spanish Tercio is actually what I plan to begin reenacting soon.
I'm with you, I've never gone in much for the hilt definition, and think blade width far more useful in defining what a sword is and how it would be used.
Hey Matt, I've gotten into knives of history over the last few years and your channel is one of my main go to channels for historical weapons, especially knives! One such knife I found particularly unique is the Iconic SOG Bowie of the Vietnam war. From what I understand the designer based the design off a bowie knife his father used to own. What always stood out to me was the the spine of the blade and its almost "batman-esk" shape. Is there any historical use of this particular shape before the SOG bowie was made? It always seemed like a fairly unique war knife for the era.
In historical reinactment in Italy I've heard the term "striscia" thrown around alongside "spada da lato" which is the translation for "side sword". But I don't know how historically accurate striscia is, the word itself means "strip"
The size of the hand protection (guard) was directly tied to the use of it. So, swords for war had massive hand covers. But, as those used for honor or in-town carry had a small one. In my opinion, swords #1 & #3 are rapiers (roperas = ropa = clothes) to be carried under the long cape. The #2 was just a battle sword, predecessor to the cavalry straight sabre.
I saw the weapon you describe at 6:00 on the weekend in a museum in Dundee (Scotland). I saw it it was massive, so I thought how can a Rapier be that big? Then I looked at the tag and it was called a "Broadsword" which... I dunno seems really wrong to call it that.
Where I live in the US, a lot of us call slip joint pliers Channelocks. This is due to a name brand Channelock that made them . Could this be the case of a sword maker named Rapier, hence his style sword was know as Rapiers. Though I would agree on blade width.
Your theory that the hilt doesn’t matter for the name, “Rapier”, meshes with my observations from the Paulus Hector Mair material. He presents the Rapier in different contexts: Rapier, Rapier & Dagger, Rapier & Buckler. However, generally speaking the hilts are different matching the off-hand tool. Fully ornate hilt with solo Rapier seems predominant, while with the dagger, often more side-sword (transitional) looking, and with buckler, more of what I’d normally refer to as an Arming sword. I should dig deeper and get some actual numbers on it, but when trying these combinations of weapons, it makes sense. Try using a buckler with a complex-hilted Rapier - kind of awkward and a bit redundant. To some extent it makes sense - I watched the video where you read the story wherein the rapier and dagger seemed to be replacing sword and buckler in England that the same may be happening in the HRE, so there would be a bias for the pairings based on the style of the day, but that style shift was likely driven by functionality, so… interesting that PHM called what I’d normally refer to as, Rapier, Side-sword, and Arming-sword, all Rapiers. And that in the 1530-40 time range all three were presented and have different hilt configuration tendencies, seemingly biased by the paired weapon… 🤔
Maybe rapiers became popular because dueling in the street without prior arrangement became popular at that time? Maybe in the Middle Ages a nobleman didn't have to carry a sword with him all the time, because if he had a conflict with someone, they agreed to meet tomorrow and have a sword duel. And then the duels suddenly started coming without any preparation and you had to have a lighter weapon to carry everyday? I don't know, that's my guess. Another reason could be the development of the wealthy bourgeoisie. Such people did not have a typical war sword at all, because they did not fight in wars, but they might have a need for a duel, so special dueling weapons were developed...? With this hand protection, it's a bit of a paradoxical thing, because you see: in Poland, the nobility had light sabers to wear with elegant clothes and heavy combat sabers. But these light, "elegant" sabers had no hand protection. This is the opposite of rapier.
I don't think (and I may be wrong here) there was much duelling in the Middle Ages.
Tournaments had melees and jousting. I'm not aware of duelling being a thing there.
Rapiers are not that light. At least as heavy an earlier cross hilt one hand swords. There balance is considerably more in the hilt, though the blade is longer, so they were not easier to wear.
LOL about dress swords an Old Professor I once had talked about his rancher Grandfather who carried a plain blue steel revolver day to day but had a smaller nickel plated one with pearl grips as his dress gun (Texas circa 1890)
8:44 - A minor thing but that's not correct. In Italian a rapier is called "striscia", not "spada". The word "stocco" is also used for both rapiers and estocs. The word "spada" means sword in its most general sense and doesn't hold any information about it except the fact that it's a sword so it would be used in general when you don't care about details, or when it's clear what you're talking about. They were using the term "spada" in treatises because there's was no confusion about the type of sword they were using.
Thanks for your Professional Information Transfer - very interesting - Thank you !
We really need to talk. I have a very very old Spanish heavy Calvary rapier, modified over time by a serious badass with a skull pommel. Full length with a square blade. An armour piercing beast on horseback. Help please. My grandfather's most expensive acquisition I want to sell after 60 years... Toledo Museum valued it at 15k.
That's probably a Bilbo, which was used by Spanish cavalry when most were armed with sabres and backswords.
I've read somewhere, that especially during the 30 years war, they used both broader swords as well as rapiers on the battlefield, but rapiers actually were used more by civilians fighting as conscripts or in mercenary groups. While the military preferred broader swords that were capable of parrying polearms and two handed weapons.
Also, while a thrust to certain parts of the body causes horrific wounds with internal bleeding, thrusts to non critical body parts often times do not stop an attacking opponent. While powerful cuts to pretty much any part of the body will probably stop an immediate attack.
So i think considering a battlefield where it is enough to disable someone and prevent him from participating in the fight, rather than the need to kill, cutting swords were probably just the better weapon.
There are metaphors in English that make it pretty clear what the Average Brit in the Street thought a rapier was: "rapier thin" and "rapier wit". Pretty obvious from those that rapiers were thought of as thin, quick, and precise.
Re, longswords being for battle: does this mean that, when in Romeo and Juliet Capulet says "Give me my long sword", Shakespeare was trying to get across "this is no longer a duel, this means WAR"?
Interesting question
What specific is that small sword/ transition you are showing????
I remember as a child, I would have been about 10 years old, looking in the window of an antique dealer and seeing two 'rapiers' but their blades were triangular in section. My surprise at seeing this is the only reason I remember this as I had assumed all swords used a typical flat blade. The place I saw this was Rochester, Kent which was where I lived at the time and the date would have been about 1955.
Are there any historical records of rapiers with triangular section blades?
My question is. What was that last sword you were holding? I would love to Find out the maker. To me that is an amazingly beautiful blade and would love to find one like it!
When history channel's deadliest warrior show had an Espada Ropera featured on an episode, they cleanly sliced a hanging pig in half with ease, with a "thrusting" sword, lol. The guy swinging it told them, it's not that straight blades can't cut like a curved blade, it's that people don't know how to cut with a straight blade (not a quote, gist of his comments to the host). That changed my perspective on how I used a rapier as well as my respect for the Espada Ropera.
In addition to a rapier blade being *slender* (as opposed to a wide), I think it must also be *straight,* so no curved rapiers!
To classify it more precisely, would you say the blade:
[1] is pointed (or can it also be rounded)?
[2] is double edged (or can it also be single edged)?
[3] has no distal taper (i.e. constant thickness)?
[4] has no width taper (i.e. constant width)?
Also, what about the blade cross-section? Doesn't this usually vary according to intended usage and hence classification?
Oh where did you buy your replica of the "Degen der Münchener Stadtgarde" from about 1600?
I really love this sword 🗡️
I shall speak for French only because I am French: in the French language “rapière” has become a synonym for sword for quite a lot of people; it’s some kind of slang word. As a result, the word appears in XIXth century newspapers or novels whatever the actual weapon considered actually is. I think it got popularised by the cloak and dagger fad.
As a result, when you encounter the word “rapière”, always identify the context, notably the context of the person using the word to establish whether or not he or she is a knowledgeable person dedicated to precisely identifying the weapon.
What is the defining characteristics between Irish, Scottish, and English (and other continental) styles of baskethilts?
One thing I've never quite understood the rationale for is the benefit of a double edged blade on a complex hilt that inherently orientates that blade. Is there some use to the lower two thirds of the false edge I'm overlooking?
I love all your posts, but when will you finaly elaborate on spada Schiavona???
Thank you for making this, always wonder how narrow should a sword's blade gets to be call a rapier and how broad a rapier's blade should be to be call a sword
I think length would play a role for some people at the time as far as use is concerned. There are some techniques that necessitate having a blade quite a bit longer than your arm.
In Portugal, we have the rapier as the florete for fencing. Don´t know the history about rapiers around here but my knowlwdge of fencing florete ain´t the same as you call rapier. We have the (estoque that we translate to rapier) but the hand guard ain´t so elaborated as a common rapier
Thank you for clarifying this. I could never figure this out.
I 100% agree with your logic and your conclusions, and we should ignore the fringe weapons that vary from any norm. I was a junior fencing champ, long before I studied bushido and long before I carried a ceremonial side arm. So I take an interest across the board.
I've always considered/understood a "rapier" to be removed from any kind of military combat. They're a tactical, 1-2-1 dueling weapon; a gentleman's costume denoting bravado or a nod to their military experience.
Louis 14th, for a few months one time he banned men from carrying rapiers, amended that to "swords" (interesting) because too many nobles were killing each other in drunken challenges to duel 😂.
Also, “épée” in French and “spada” in Italian are connected and have the same origin. Same for the German “Spaten”, though that now means “shovel” instead of “spade” (“Schwert” in modern German).
And shpaga in Russian is also epée...
Totally unrelated to the topic of this video, but I've been wondering: what purpose did the "knuckle chain" on certain Polish/Eastern European sabres serve? Was it completely ornamental? Because I can't picture it offering any real hand protection like a knuckle bow would.
Matt, it might be interesting to explore the origin of this dichotomy in what the early 16th century? At what point and why did civilians adopt a narrower sword, and did this dichotomy lead on to a difference in sword techniques for civilian duels versus war?
Researching to write books can be so informative my MC uses a Side-sword which as I understand is a style of rapier with a broader blade so videos like this help a tonne (edit) just got to the part about the side-sword and well damn I guess you learn something new everyday so the term side-sword is a more modern invention, definitely a lot of conflicting info about the names and types of different swords online but I know I want my MC to have a cutting and thrusting style sword so I shall continue researching
Great vid, very interesting.
What you said.
We do like to over complicate things based on occasional outliers and the pedantic nature of dedicated historians.
Thinner, longer, thrust centric is what we and historically they mean (t).
Good video my man!
I am American and was talking to a friend from Canada about the 2nd amendment and how we have to take into context the Era it was written in. Is there a chance you could talk about the periods where weapons were commonly carried and what the weapons culture was like from the 1600-1800s?
Aria's needle from Game of Thrones! 😍 It's a kind of rapier! 😉 I love "thrusting swords"! I just never thought of Aria's sword as a rapier! Nice! 😍
George silver goes into much detail about rapier and other swords in England during the rough time period you mentioned.
You didn't mention balance points.
My shallow knowledge puts the balance point of a thrusting sword closer to the hand but closer to the tip for a cutting sword.
3:53 were leopards kept as house pets back then?
I think it's a jaguar and this is demonstrating his adventures & business interests in South America.
right, apparently the confusing usage of the term 'rapier' for smallsword (and/or for fleuret) seems to be original, and making the distinction between these thrust-centric weapons is novel. One did evolve from the other, so its not too strange that the term stuck.
I recently found (online) an official yugoslavian ministry of army fencing treatise from 1940, which I found interesting given the late date for something fencing related to have an official military connection and apparently being taught at a military academy -- and its titled, when translated, "manual for fighting with sabre and rapier", and that's a reprint from a treatise from 1933. Explains the term fleuret as a synonym, but generally uses 'rapier'. And I'm sure this terminology was not novel then, given its anachronism.
I've often wondered: Who the hell was the brave soul who first decided to call the rapier arms race off and wear a shorter one? It's just occurred to me: Perhaps someone who was very good at fencing. Being high status others then followed suit. (Look how cool I am! I don't need a very long rapier!) Or perhaps it was just someone high status like ~Mercutio~ the Prince of Wales and others followed the fashion. Or maybe it was just someone who didn't actually expect to use it and wanted the convenience of a shorter sword.
Or someone that was tired of getting tangled up with the long blade every time he tried sitting down.
What make and model is that reproduction you're using in this video? It look like the Cavalier Rapier you can see on the Arms and Armor website.
I agree as to the width determines the difference. Basically in my opinion if a blades cut could reasonably sever a hand by cutting thru the bone it would be a sword while a rapier would be only useful in cutting flesh. In other words a rapier can cut while a sword would also be able to cleave similar to a kitchen knife vs a meat cleaver.
And to make things even trickier, what about the Spanish Conquistador swords? Some of those have fullered blades that are clearly wider then the average rapier, but narrower then the typical sidesword. And to add insult to injury, they often have hilts that are less complex then the usual rapier hilts, despite being fairly long, and possibly more thrust then cut oriented? How would we classify those? And how did the Spanish classify them at the time if they did?
is there any dissenting information? im also surprised about sideswords not being a contemporary term as (and i know it is a different language lol) i thought spada de latto was in usage.
in your previous video on shakespeare stabbings one of the incidents mentions a longsword, would it be safe to assume then that this case was talking about a longsword? furthermore how exclusive is the term rapier to being just a narrow thrusting sword, i couldve sworn you have some videos stating that the swepthilt sidesword you have couldve been called a rapier and if im not mistaken doesnt joachim meyer call a similar such sword a rapier (agin i know thatd be a different language but nonetheless it might maybe could bear some parsel of relevance in elizabethan era english)
It kind of feels like the perception of what defined a rapier became more of a generic term for sword in a sporting sense as sport fencing became more of the purpose than self defense.
Could I request a video on the british weapons of the 18th century (meaning personal arms, such as swords, daggers, pistols, and muskets, rather than artillery and polearms)?
Good info, but what can you tell us about the Toledo Salamanca?
About not wearing swords even in places where you had no legal restrictions in the middle ages, I'm wondering if there was some social stigma... Kinda like in the states in the USA where you can open carry firearms but it just doesn't looks right at all.
It's not just social stigma in this regard but also safety. Assaults are generally conducted from an ambush, and a gun draws attention to the carrier as potential danger to be eliminated first. It can also make you a target for a gun, many career criminals learn to steal holstered guns (I'm sure you've seen some videos or news about exactly this happening to a cop, including some fairly gruesome clips where said cop ends up being executed. And cops are a prime target because they carry the gun outside of the fighting angle, that is at the back and out of their sight and immediate reach).
Anyway I totally see this to have been the case, we know for example that having a large all-purpose knife in many more developed states all the way back in 1830s wasn't particularly well seen (I suspect especially in cities), Matt even quoted a source from mid 1800s in one of his bowie videos
In Spain, any sword for civilian use and a straight blade was called a rapier. however, the word rapier is often accompanied by a type specification such as lace, cut and point or just point (for stabbing only), cup-hilted, puntilla, etc.
There are examples of cup-hilted rapiers with slightly wide blades, which could be taken as the perfect example of a rapier, but they are called "swords" just because they are not intended for civilian use.
At around 6 minutes the discussion of the differences between the rapier and the broadsword remind me so much of the final duel in the 1995 "Rob Roy" movie. You may mention this but I paused to post ;)
Hi guys, here you have some sabers . on YT : "Sabaton - Winged Hussars (Music Video)"
I would be interested in battlefield accounts from the 16th and 17th century where "rapiers" were used. I always found it fascinating that the last generation of calvary swords (20th century) were long narrow thrusting blades in many cases. I've often wondered about the battlefield durability of rapiers and weather that was the biggest reason most military swords had wider blades. I have a notion that the cutting blade was more effective in quickly incapacitating an enemy in the age of firearms, where if stabbed, an enemy could still pull a trigger.
Stabbed guy can chop a head or two off, with enough adrenaline tho.