If guns had never been invented we'd still be having the debate what sword was better in various situations. The point about stopping power sounds exactly like the caliber debate. 9mm guys would then be carrying rapiers saying "thrust placement is all the matters" then the .45 guys would use broadswords saying "big blade makes a big hole."
People are still having the "what sword is better in what situations" even though fire arms were invented. You haven't noticed even though you watch at least this sword channel?
One thing in the stopping power department: A wider blade makes a wider wound channel, even with a thrust. Blades kill by exsanguination and a wider wound channel lets more blood out in less time. When your opponent is trying to kill you, the sooner he stops the better you will like it.
@@farkasmactavish Which goes to the point of greater versatility that he was making. The other thing is that cuts, even when they're not fatal will disable an opponent more quickly, a life saving feature when he's trying to let your own insides outside.
@@farkasmactavish correct. Blood loss is the ultimate killer but there's so many weak points that a cutting blade can target better. And even if it isn't fatal, like said in the video, a severed hamstring and similar is essentially an end to the fight, at least if there is enough space for the opponents to fall back into. I guess it depends a lot on the era but soldiers didn't always slaughter each other down to the last man.
Sadly I reckon the hilt might be a little complicated for that. Who knows though, I mean windless could probably make them I just doubt the price point would be great If you do want one there's a scottish company called Armourclass which specialise in basket hilts. They're great, I have a rapier from them and it's brilliant
Your point about Stopping Power needed to include the fact that cuts don't always hit flesh. In those cases a light, narrow rapier would sting and leave a bruise; but a blade with more mass stands a chance of breaking a bone and thus rendering the opponent less combat effective.
Being as most rapiers were just as heavy as broadswords of the era, this isn't really a distinguishing factor. Rapier blades are long and rigid, but they aren't light like a smallsword. The point of balance and percussion may be further from the point on a rapier, but as period broadswords were also designed for thrusting they also weren't the best choppers.
@@colbunkmust Well, if depends. If you use a broadsword balanced for horseback, cutting the force of a horse and the POB even more forward cus the ideal for swordplay is calvary combat isn't exactly fencing, I bet it could. Stocatta has some examples of early Scottish broadswords and with seven to inch point of balances. Thegnthrand has several were he breaks cinderblock and ribs through mail and padding. It is isn't the most energy efficent way to put a man down, but it had be effective. Another think I would say if that is military setting, I would person is more to likely to not have to defend themself against things which would break a blade, a person would use a blade in ways which put more stress of the weapon.
@@PJDAltamirus0425 "cus the ideal for swordplay is calvary combat isn't exactly fencing" All combat with swords is "fencing" regardless of what type of sword or how it is being used. I get what you're trying to say, but I'm very much opposed to promoting the idea that "fencing" is just one type of sword combat. It isn't. You made some fine points, but rapiers vary in size and dimension as well as broadswords. I wasn't saying you can't break some bones with a broadsword, but the scenarios where you break bone but also don't cut someone aren't going to be very high and the most likely scenarios for breaking bones would also be scenarios where a rapier would do the same, i.e. a strike against a hand. The big advantage of the broadsword is still very much its cutting capacity, not its bludgeoning capability.
@@colbunkmustThe fact that the weight of a rapier is in the hand and not the blade means that when you whack somebody with the blade, it's necessarily transferring less force.
@@farkasmactavish Yes, but I already addressed this. The difference isn't going to be tremendous between the two as the hilt designs are usually similar. And also assuming the rapier is heavily thrust focused, it's going to have a longer blade so even if the point of percussion is further back from the point, there's still a bunch of mass at a similar distance from the hilt.
The point regarding stopping power is a good one. It is relatively easy for a narrow sword to pass all the way through an opponent and not hit anything critically important. When you want your opponent to stop trying to stab you, especially when stabbing through their torso, a wider stab is going to be much more likely to hit a major artery or something else vital. Cutting more deeply is also more likely to disable a limb or cause more significant bleeding. People who are injured do not instantly fall down and die like in the movies, and the degree of disability a wound causes is important to surviving the encounter; it's pretty common for both the "winner" and "loser" of knife fights to end up in the hospital and 17th century medicine left a lot to be desired. There are parallels to the concept of stopping power in firearms: pistol rounds lack sufficient energy to cause shockwaves which damage tissue around the wound, and act in many ways like little rapier stabs. It's not until you add the kind of energy rifles can impart to a bullet that you see significant shockwave effects, and explains why pistol rounds more often than not fail to disable a person even when hit in the head and center-torso.
I agree with your overall point, which is correct from wound assessment standpoint. That being said, please be so kind and educate yourself to dispense with the "schockwave" myth, as no such thing exists. I refer you to study the conclusions of the works of Dr. Fackler as you can google them under International Wound Ballistics Association Review particularly issue no5 part 2. Further on channel Primary & Secondary Modcasts Return of DocGKR (Dr. Gary Roberts - one of 3 late Dr. Fackler's successors) Also Modcast on Terminal Ballistics (next eg modcast on headshots and pelvic girdle shots). Those are valid sources that done only valid research in the field of Wound Ballistics accessible to non-LE/mil personel like two of us. They researched both inflicting various wounds via various projectile constructions and treatment of said wounds. Even exceeding up to Mach7 projectile speed no permanent dmg was imparted via temporary strech of soft tissues (aka schockwave) and only relevant tissue dmg is the one directly done by the physical body of the bullet and crushed tissue in its wound channel or by unstable bullet being upset in tissue - thus only realiable wounding mechanism of bullet same as sword is hit to biologicaly important structure - heart (10-30sec timer) OR brain stem - instant switch off, decapitation). Other injurries are giving the adversary to vote if he wants to continue or not in the fight. End of walloftext, sorry. Hope that helps. +][+
It's a sword not a harpoon. Swords get stuck in people in the sense that you have to draw them from your target to continue to attack. This isn't a sword in the stone.
@@aaftiyoDkcdicurak in a battlefield any time you lose is against you, your opponents won't "give you a sec " If you notice modern bayonets are shorter and wider than their early 20th century counterparts for that exact reason, stuck between the reabs for example and your will be exposed until your weapon is unstuck
This was touched on in a fantasy novel I read way back. One character scolds another, "You stab a guy, the first six inches will kill him. The extra *yard* doesn't really help."
I think I read another point about stopping power summed up in John Silver. A thrust to a lot of areas doesn't kill or disable someone full of adrenaline before they can attack you back. A cut from a Broadsword, however, will disable pretty much anywhere you hit like the arm, because the force is distributed enough to stop their motion while doing serious immediate damage to muscle and tendons.
Another point about armor besides damage to the weapon. In the 16/17th century, it was pretty common for soldiers to be wearing cuirass with arms and legs unarmored or less armored. A thrust or cut isn't likely to do much against a cuirass. But it is easier to hit arms and legs with cuts.
Yep. In the "real" saber fencing it is not that difficult to slash at the transitioning from a parry. With rapier this is pretty useless, with saber it may destroy your opponent mobility, in a melee this means you can move on another target,
I like the over penetration point. Sure, a broader blade might not penetrate as deeply or as easily, but people aren’t generally THAT thick. I think the FBI penetration standard for bullets into ballistic gel is between 12-18” to ensure sufficient depth to hit vitals from any angle. From most angles where a stab would come from, that’s probably more than is needed. That’s not a hard and fast rule, of course, but you certainly don’t need to get 40” of blade all the way through a torso if 12” gets them just as dead.
In the old days in my country there was the general belief that any blades longer than " four fingers" is life threatening Actually some police officers still use the four finger rule, although there is no legal basis for that And it's kinda hard to find bigger folding, survival and other knifes longer than that with the only exception being kitchen knives since most people want to be on the safe side of things
0:36 I don't think people called it rapier for the cup hilt, i think is because the spanish called a ropera and when you translate that into english is rapier.
"who would decide to duel in a confined space?" the french. Specifically Colonel Barbier-Dufai and Captain Raoul de Vere had a duel to the death in the back of a carriage while tied together by their left arms.
I'm quite glad you are covering spanish swords. I wondered why you didn't, given that spanish Steel and the spanish military have been quite relevant in european history. I'm no historian, hema practitioner or sword enthusiast, so I have no clue why spanish treatises were not spoken about and so on. Maybe the cultural isolation of the spanish peninsula, which at some point turned their back on Europe? Great channel, thx!
Ya es sorprendente que hablen de espadas españolas. Y este caballero es verdaderamente un maestro. Sobre los tratados de esgrima y escuelas, bueno, siempre se deja de lado la tradición española y su importancia. Aunque los españoles llevaron a la Italia del Renacimiento su esgrima prevaleciendo sobre italianos y franceses, y luego sobre otros ejércitos europeos en el siglo XVII. Te recomiendo de Benedetto Croce “España en la vida italiana del Renacimiento” a propósito de los ‘jaqués’, los espadachines españoles que llevó César Borgia a Roma y la impronta que dejó el ejército español en aquellos tiempos terribles y emocionantes, lo que se decía de ellos, para bien y para mal. No es cuestión de que España “diera la espalda a Europa”, las razones están en otra parte.
Se conocían, pero obviamente es un canal de habla inglesa por lo que prioriza la historia de su país y los que mejor relación han tenido con el suyo. El tratado más relevante en relación con las espadas roperas son los de "Verdadera destreza".
@@nobodyexpectssi4654 Las razones son la leyenda negra, No es casualidad que las peliculas de los años de dominio español se centran en piratas. Se trata de evitar hablar de los periodos históricos en los que los ánglos no eran el ombligo del mundo como ahora. Por cierto la ropera se desarrollo por primera vez en España e Italia (cuyas ciudades principales eran parte de España). Tampoco hay películas de los tercios que inventaron la guerra moderna con armas de fuego, los vikingos que saqueaban Inglaterra se demonizaron etc. Y lo que es peor, los españoles nos avergonzamos de nuestra propia historia por el simple hecho de no querer parecernos a un dictador nacionalista. Si un país no respeta su historia, que no espere que un enemigo histórico le haga justicia.
@@MiguelMartinez-tn1vu Spain has one of the best ancient weapons and armour museums in the World ! I was lucky enough to get a personal guided tour when I came from Australia, even though the Royal Armoury Museum was closed for renovations. The Curator was very proud of the items on display there !
@@MiguelMartinez-tn1vu A mí, francamente, lo que piensen los demás me es indiferente. Como decía Alonso Quijano; “Yo sé quién soy”. ¿Un dictador nacionalista? Venga ya
Since we're entering the realm of fiction, may as well throw in both real weapon designs and fictional designs. There's the 1833 Spanish Naval Cutlass, Armor Venue Royal Navy 1804 Pattern Cutlass, Bardiche Axe, 16th Century German or French Battle Axe, Zulu Winged War Axe, Mambele Knife-Axe, Dragonpike (Fire Emblem), Wyrmslayer Sword (Fire Emblem), Dragon Axe (Fire Emblem), Levin Sword (Fire Emblem), Netherite Sword (Minecraft), Netherite Axe (Minecraft), Master Sword (The Legend of Zelda), Gilded Sword (Zelda), Magical Sword (Zelda), Great Fairy's Sword, Fire and Light Arrows, Fire Rod (Zelda), Fire Flower (Super Mario), Tanooki Suit (Super Mario), Hammer Suit (Super Mario), Skull Hammer, Megaton Hammer... Ji polearm, Qinglong Ji, Yari, European one-handed spear, Arming Sword, Spatha, European Long Sword, Short Bow, Atlatl, Pulwar, Shamshir, Bowie Knife, Negrito Bolo Knife, Japanese Meiji Artillery Sword, Shashka Saber, 1889 British Sergeant's Saber, 1856 Pioneer Hanger Sword, Yanling Dao, Woyao Dao, Chokuto, Kopis, Seiryu and Kiryu longer length knives, Japanese styled Tanto, two-handed war hammer, Kris Sword, Flamberge, Khyber Sword, and Visayan Barong.
If we go by „they“ as the real people of that age, I would argue that „they“ would have used pretty much the weapon he shows here. This type of weapon was after all used in the Americas (aka the frontier), on ships, while riding and in war, so it’s pretty much the allrounder of side arms. So definitely the weapon „they“ would have chosen for any unpredictable and dangerous situation like a dungeon. After that other weapons to take along probably depend on how lightweight „they“ wanted to go as a heavier weapon or a crossbow could go nicely with the bilbo sword. Bottom line: in 16th century take this weapon as it’s at least ok in most situations.
If Matt ever wants to work on an RPG then I would love to help with that 😊 I am Amalgamated Research Gaming Hub and my Heroes & Henchmen RPG is a licenced derivative of K&C's old Hackmaster 4e (HM4E)
Something you rarely ever mention: A broader point is dealing more internal damage. A stab from a gladius is much worse than from a slender rapier. Partially because a broader point can be sharpened to a much higher degree. It's like a difference between being cut with a shaving razor and stepping on a nail. A sharp razor may produce a barely perceptible cut, yet it keeps on bleeding seemingly forever, while when you step on a nail you are worried that despite it penetrating very deeply, it hardly bleeds at all, which increases the chance for an infection.
@@scholagladiatoria This "stopping power" thing? Maybe I didn't get it, but it looked like you emphasized a different aspect of it. The way you put it, it seemed like "rapier would be better at thrusting, but the guy might still end up in shanking range". The way I put it is: "it might be easier to *score* a point with a rapier, but it's much worse to be stabbed by a broader and sharper point". Similarly, when dealing with polearms, it seemed like you put more emphasize on being able to defend with a sword, than on effective offense. I think that being able to snipe the hand which holds the polearm with a quick cut is more important than a slightly increased chance of parrying a thrust. The other guy knows it, so he keeps his hands away, or grabs a longer spear, which slows him down.
It depends more on if they were service shapened or nor. As delivered from manufacturer and recieved and put in armoury, the were not donewith final edge. That being put on only when war was declared and your unit deployed and specificaly order: Sharpen the swords! was given. +][+
4:47 at the Battle of Lützen Swedish cavalry armed with Rapiers where able to break imperial pikesquares. At the battle of Breitenfelde imperial cavalry were able to copy this tactic and break swedish pikesquare.
I mean, in the battle of Lutzen the Swedish cavalry used guns to dominate the imperial pike squares and imperial sword cavalry. Either pointy sword would have worked, it was their combined arms that made the difference.
@johnandrewserranogarcia7223 you're true they Had both. But they were able to do the Impossible, breaking pikesquares charging sword in handwhich we're considered invinceable by cavaly
Assuming you are translating "värja" to rapier: many swords that are in Swedish called värja are not very thrust centric like the rapiers we think of. Some Swedish "värja" were quite similar to cavalry swords from other parts of Europe, with a pretty wide blade and sometimes a thumb ring instead of finger rings. 18th century värja used by Carolus Rex's soldiers are also quite broad and cut.
@@atom8248 In german literature about The 30 Years War the swords used by the Cavalry of Gustav Adolphus are considered Rapiers like their counterparts used by the Cavalry in the Imperial Army. Because both Designs were thrust centric. In the 18th century Cavalry swords used in Central Europe were although broader and of a Cut and Thrust design
This is why I keep saying that comparing rapier vs katana is not a good comparison, because one is a thrust-centric weapon designed for civilian duel, and the other is a cut-centirc weapon designed for wartime combat. A better comparison would be saber vs katana, or in this case a bilbo vs katata. The dueling setting in civilian life is very different from the scrable of wartime combat.
@@KenoticMuse A Katana or rather the Uchigatana (in Japan Katana just means single edged sword and doesn't need to be japanese, it can be a western saber for instance, while what we westerners call a katana is really the Uchigatana) is mainly civilian use sword that still got used in War as a backup weapon to Bow and spear. But it most often was the courtly arms and everyday status symbol Samurai wore. As such it is a good parallell to the sidesword. Although indeed not in function as you point out. The Tachi is the War Sword that preceeded it that was an actual main weapon of War, although it too often was used secondarily to bow and spear. The Tachi is designed to be worn with Armor, is longer and more curved and is worn suspended at two points with edge down horizontally at the side to not be in the way in armor on horseback.
@@thunder2434 I don't think katana was used mainly as civilian sword, but the answer depends on the period setting. For example, in periods of peace and there's no war, then the katana wouldn't be worn in battle, and it would used in civilian setting. However, to my understanding, the katana was used in combat setting (whenever there was a war) up until at least 16th century. Then, during the peace time of the Edo period, the katana started to be used mainly as civilian status symbol, because obviously there was not a lot of "war" to fight in.
@@KenoticMuse Yes, I meant in the Edo period. Uchigatana did indeed exist before this and back then was a battlefield weapon alongside the Tachi. It became popular in later eras but existed earlier and I meant when it was dominant as a sword. You're right the timeframe you pick is important to the use of it. Sorry about that. Or I may as well just be wrong at this point. I was just trying to be helpful. Just disregard all I posted.
You are both somewhat correct: the tachi was used as the secondary weapon to the bow and spear (not backup weapon: backup weapon means you would use it if plans go awry, but not if things go according to plan; secondary weapon means you wouldn't use it in the beginning of the battle and use something else instead, which would be your primary weapon, but you would fully expect to deploy it at some point during the battle), both on horseback and on foot, and is the older weapon from which uchigatana descended, and both coexisted for a while, but eventually, when foot combat became more common than mounted combat, the uchigatana became the more widely used secondary weapon. The tachi never truly went out of use before the sengoku era ended and the edo era began, but its use had become much less common than the uchigatana by that point, restricted mostly to the cavalry and mounted infantry. After the sengoku era ended and the edo era began, however, it was the uchigatana that would go on to become the samurai's primary weapon, because now, they were no longer soldiers of war who were expected to fight both on horseback and on foot, but law enforcers and bureaucrats who would usually operate on foot, both outdoors and indoors, but their lives were not very peaceful despite no ongoing open wars: there were outlaws and bandits of all kinds in all sorts of places, assassination attempts and honour duels; there would have been very few samurai in the edo period who never needed to kill another human being in violent conflict.
But we know that Katanas were worn regularly in peacetime as defensive weapons and rapiers were also carried in war and it's likely they were used against each other to a limited degree. It's not a bad comparison because the whole point of a comparison is to compare two completely polar opposite designs. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
That is a nice Antique example! I almost bought one that was like a Colichemarde small sword. It was a Spanish Cup Hilt Rapier, that had maybe a 2" wide blade at the cup for about a foot, then transitioned into a rapier blade. It is on Fagan Arms website, in their past items under Cup Hilt Rapier. Cheers!!!@@scholagladiatoria
I'd argue that's less relevant for war. You will almost always have time to draw unless you are on the front lines of an ambush, which would probably be with guns anyway.
To me it is like when (back in the day) NY City Police Officers carried a 2" barreled 5 or 6 shot revolver while off duty, but when on duty they switched over to a heavier 6 shot 4" barreled revolver. The light one for just in case social affrays, the heavy one with more punch for duty use.
I'd point out a possible overlap between two of your points: cuts and stopping power. You've said before that cuts have more stopping power than thrusts, and are more likely to disable an opponent instantly
Combine that with rapier's ability to cut an unarmored opponent vs the broadsword's increased mass allowing it to cut or stab through things like leather and fabric armor, assuming it's geometry allows.
So is a Broadsword just any double edged straight sword with a wide blade and a more enclosed hilt such as rapier and and basket style hilts? Like if they all had the same blade, would it be: Arming Sword = Crossguard, Sidesword = Addition of rings and partial complex hilt, Broadsword = full complex hilt or fully enclosed? (Also I know its modern terminology, in the past calling a sword a broad sword, just meant it was broader that another sword)
Yes, that was the standard terminology for sword nerds until HEMA started getting up in arms about its ahistorical usage towards medieval swords. Broadsword is a term used in context of understanding in comparison to rapiers and smallswords and such. But they also predate these weapons, and so HEMA nerds get mad when medieval swords are described as Broadswords, and that is not what they'd be called in the time before rapiers were introduced. Much like how you could describe any curved sword as a type of sabre, even if it is not European. However, someone very excited about their falchion might get a bit testy if you "reduce" it to a term that wasn't used to describe it.
@@MasoTrumoiit’s also just better in the modern age to be a bit more specific so people know what you’re talking about without having to describe it in detail every time.
Czech (Corona Regni Bohemiae) word Kord is derived from German term for Swept-hilt of sidesword - Korb (meaning basket). 1670+ heavy cavalry swords then being termed pallasch (Czech Palaš) in Holy Roman Empire lands and Poland. Sometimes Highland Baskethilt is also termed among the Scottish pallash here :) +][+
The broadword is superior on the retreat. If, for one instance, I'm pulling back I can keep doing that while still cutting/slashing. If thrusting is my only real way of hurting an opponent, then I'm forced into a movement opposite of the way I want to go. Another instance I can think of is obstacles: if you were fighting at a fence or short wall, or over a cannon, or whatever, the physical barrier is a significant obstacle for thrusting, while you can still hack and slash over the top of it with no problem.
I was looking into the etymology of the rapier some time ago. There is a French word 'rapiere' which means 'grater', from 'rape' (pronounced 'rap-ay') which means 'to grate'. Because the hilts are aften perforated and look like culinary graters. This, I think is not the correct etymology as there is another etymology, which is from a Spanish word 'ropera' which was a clothes salesperson or wardrobe keeper. It would seem to be related to the English word 'wardrobe' to me. This Spanish term is a much more realistic and appropriate origin for this type of sword, I believe. Due to the fact that the word 'ropera' indicates that the rapier was primarily intended as a DRESS sword - rather than a robust military weapon. It would explain why the sword is lightweight, designed primarily for lightning quick thrust movements (therefore not good in melee as you point out), and they are often very highly decorated. To the point of being like 'fashion accessories', back in the day. Thought of in this manner, as primarily DRESS swords, your points are spot on (IMHO).
It is called a "ropera" sword because it was carried as an accessory to clothing, "ropa" means "clothes", generally used as a fashion accessory and as a weapon for dueling, personal defense and military use.
@@benicabanas9793 an rapier is not for personal defense or military use. it's an dueling sword, sorry but having an extremely long, thin, one handed sword is not good for chaotic foot fighting.
In german the word Robe exists also , is currently rare used, means a kind of dated looking formal dress, for example black Robe used by judges and lawyers at court. But we german speakers call rapiers, smallswords, spadroons, sport epee, duel epee only Degen, sometimes even heavy cavallry swords are included, but not medieval swords, this are Schwerter ( plural).
@@stefthorman8548 In Spain at the time, any sword intended for dueling or dressing purposes, accompanying the clothing of a civilian (or a soldier in civilian clothes), was called a ropera, leaving, therefore, only purely military swords, with simple garrison, outside this denomination.
I guessed 5 reasons before actually watching the video and got them all right! Another reason, derived from the broadswords cutting power, might have been to induce bleeding: a desperate man who has been run through and still has a blade stuck in him may be in pain and possibly dying, but if he's not bleeding he can probably keep going for a long time beyond exacting his revenge. With a broadsword, on the other hand, even a shallow stab would be much more catastrophic in the damaged area, causing bleeding and quicker weakening of the opponent.
good point: a duel, a rapier is more likely to hit first, but that duelist is also more likely to keep fighting. There's some pretty horrifying stories about duels with smallswords where both men kill each other: one gets impaled and still keep going to deal mortal wounds to his opponents. Or that gory dueling picture showing the men kebabing each other.
Thanks for clearing this up for me. I had similar preferences for stouter blades as being more warlike. I think that cleaving a person's arm off in a duel was frowned upon, hence a sticky weapon seemed more civilized.
Your comment about why would anyone want to duel in a confined space reminded me of Mark Twain's (aka Samuel Clemens) story of being asked to set up a duel while he was traveling in Europe. In "Innocent's abroad" IIRC. Very funny of course.
Hi! Thanks for that video - very informative. Btw. You've got a lot of videos about weapons around all world, but... maybe you could make one about something called (in polish language) "Koncerz"? It's hard to pronounce in english and hard to get information about - in general it was thrust centric weapon from XVII century and as we know - it was only used by mounted soldier. If you could get somehow replica of that and tell what you think about that as duelling / infantry weapon because it looks like rapier / tuck but sabre hilted - it could be great! OK, thanks by the way!
Rapiers are also harder to pull out when needed, shorter weapons come out faster and easier, I have had plenty of times in 17th Century re-enactment when someone tries to pull out a rapier on me and my short dussack allows for faster action switching from pike to short weapons. They were almost always secondary weapons after muskets, pikes, pistols or polearms.
Playing a bunch of Hellish Quart against a friend who heavilly favors the Rapier (Marta more than Marie) so much of what your saying here seems to make sense, In an honorable duel the rapier is so hard to not get poked with (it might take 3 or more pokes though). Long guard just makes the stand off so big its really difficult to do very much of anything but once you get around that its a different story and on a battle field there wouldn't be much honorably standing directly in front of just one opponent. Its obviously no subsitute for real knowledge but I can see how when going on to an actually battlefield choosing something with more blade mass as it were was a common choice. A first strike to deflect the blade then a follow up strike is a good stratergy which would seem like the sort of the thing battlefields would be rife with and the recent introduction of Maryna who has the Sabre and Kalkan provides an analog for the other battle field issue a rapier would face, sheilds. Its all extrapolation from the hema game sure but the lesson I have learnt is don't duel the rapier you'll ussually lose but once your in to a brawl/scrap a rapier user is in a much worse situation.
Another point to consider is the weapon's usefulness if it breaks. If a broadsword breaks, it essentially becomes a large knife, which can still be effective on the battlefield. In contrast, if a rapier breaks, it turns into an awkwardl toothpick.
One additional advantage the broad sword has is that when you stop thinking and start fighting from instinct, we hit things with the stick in our hand, not thrust. Every little kid has picked up a stick and started hitting things with it. When we get tired or injured, we naturally default to swinging, and a rapier is almost worthless in that situation.
14:37 Despite the fact I always talk about weight, I think I'd much rather have a broadsword blade with a cup hilt in a civilian setting, than a rapier in a military setting. So if I could only afford one sword, better a Bilbao than a rapier.
Id love a video that discusses the nuances and changes that modern material science adds to the picture. Like whats the preferable setup if we are talking solely using modern materials?
Have you heard about this new thing called a "gun?" It's gonna make rapiers AND broadswords obsolete! More seriously, modern material science doesn't really change any of this. Only one of those five points is altered in any meaningful way, and while modern steel is somewhat more durable (and more reliably/consistently so) than period steel, it's not a huge difference in this context. Even modern rapiers aren't built to stand up to use in a cavalry charge, and so if you had modern materials and were planning a trip to a 17th Century battlefield, a modern rapier still might not be as good a choice as a modern broadsword.
@ his coverage on why sabers are still scene in the modern gun world were interesting. Ive always viewed this channel as the place to pretend they dont exist lol. Are the big heavy contenders like great swords affected at all with compounds like carbotanium? i think thats how you spell it)
Polish cavalry sabers habitually minced Swedish ritters with their rapiers. For a serious thrusting by cavalry see Polish Hussars "koncerz" (kinda really long epee), but of course for melee they had their Hussar sabers ...
It's important to note that the Hussars had three types of swords, often carrying two of those three into battle: the szabla, the koncerz and the Palasz. Sabers, estocs and broadswords all different functions, and the role of the Hussar is to be able to fight many, many different types of soldier, riding to key points in the battle to exploit openings. You might turn from fighting a Akinci to an armored sipahi or an unarmored janissary or artilleryman all in quick succession. You could charge into a big press of Swedish or Russian Reiters, get the first wave with the lance, then kebab them with the koncerz, then start swinging the Nadziak around to cave in their heads. The idea was to be able to fight a lot of people, with a lot of variety.
Yes, but as I recall, they were "single-use" weapons. Thus it was expected that soldier delivers stab, run enemy through and leave weapon behind hoping to retrieve it after victorious battle from the corpse. Thus they had another weapon for the work after the 1st contact
Another reason to use a broadsword over a thinner rapier is that the thrust wound will be wider and induce more shock and more instant bleeding. You'd die from the rapier minutes, hours or even days later from the same depth of wound that'd put you in instant shock and even death from bleeding out quickly from a broadsword. This has several advantages. For one if you wound an opponent they're out of the fight instead of skewering you as well even though they're mortally wounded from a thin blade. For another, fighting multiple opponents you'd want to dispose of enemies quickly to then focus on the next opponent. Now I'm not saying that you can't insta-kill an oponent with a rapier (throat, eye socket, heart or a major internal artery for instance) but there are many historical accounts of someone mortally wounding an opponent with a rapier, say run through the other fellows midsection and they in turn being skewered as well because the opponent didn't immediately fall down dead or even immediately incapacitated. If it had been a wide blade that would probably end the fight instantly from shock and massive blood loss in seconds.
I think the point of stopping power is really well thought. I have received thrusts with a long sword it spear that have put me on the ground, where as a fencing foil I need to pull myself back from running up it.
Agreed 100% Hence why I chose a rather chunky but shorter cut & thrust blade for my rapier. However tbh I prefer my saber & qama set over my rapier & left hand dagger. Yes the rapier has more protection etc but the saber paired with that gladius like short sword fits my style of fighting better. Plus they are easier to wear imo.
as far as people having a dual in a confined space, im gonna broaden that to a fight in general rather than some sort of legal duel dispute. if your primary weapon is a shorter one like a cinquedea and you like being up close and wrestling, you could use wrestling to throw a person in a wall. the wall can also protect from certain angles of cuts and minimizes where people can come from. if the other person has a longer weapon, you have an advantage in confined spaces like trees and heavy foliage to give you more room for your cutting arcs.
On your 4th point on "stopping power" you missed other advantage for the wider blade would be it will also cause a larger possibly more debilitating wound track. 👍👍
One of the reasons foil targets are limited to the torso (and why academic fencing is limited to only the target over the opponents heart) is precisely an issue of stopping power. Unless you thrust directly into the heart, your opponent is not guaranteed to go down immediately, and any thrust outside the torso means you still have a fight ahead of you. Almost any thrust to the torso or throat is likely to be deadly eventually, but a cut to a limb tends to be far more debilitating (which is why arms are a legal target in saber)
could you do a video on the early & military rapiers; I want to have a fantasy on that is inspired by that & represent that for my D&D rouge. I imagion an adventure would need to take the same things into consterations as solgers but you & tod would know so much more!
Expanding a little on robustness: In a chaotic environment, like an active battle, the weapon is much more likely to encounter something hard. That's not necessarily just armor. Can shrapnel or even just concussion damage your weapon? What if a friendly soldier gets shoved into your way and whacks it with their weapon or just a piece of solid kit? Fragility is a very bad quality for any piece of equipment going into battle -- or even on campaign.
For all the reasons mentioned plus: a swordsman need not be particularly skilled with a slashing weapon to be effective and dangerous, whereas being effective with a thrust-only sword in the chaos of melee is significantly more difficult. Killing the opponent is not the bar either, or even necessarily the goal. Incapacitating the opponent is all that is necessary. And for that a slash is going to have much better odds, because you do not have to hit the head or torso-a slash to an arm or leg could take someone out of the fight. At worst, it would be enough distraction for you to finish them off with another blow. By contrast, some rapier treatises demonstrate allowing your opponent to run your offhand through as a means of controlling their blade, presumably to set up a riposte that kills them.
How about epee? Its stiff enough for great thrusts, my fav after i find out how stiff they are.. hmmm interesting if its heavier or lighter then broadsword...
It's always odd to me that anyone would not want a balanced cut-and-thrust blade except in very specific contexts. So often, the most natural follow up to a cut is a thrust, and the most natural follow up to a thrust is a cut. There are reasons in a duel or on horseback that versatility may not be as important. But, in the general case, I want a sword that is roughly equally good at cuts and thrusts.
Just looking at the two side-by-side, a broadsword also seems much better for defense as well as attack. A rapier's thin, relatively floppy blade does well against other blades of a similar construction but would fair very poorly against larger weapons, as you mentioned. A wider, thicker blade is more likely to block attacks from a wider variety of opposing weapons, something which a rapier would require a supplementary item like a buckler or a dagger to pull off the same maneuver.
Don't know if anyone has said it yet, but in my mind the top reason you'd want a blade with cutting potential is basic biomechanics: our bodies are more naturally inclined to swing than poke when under stress. If you look at how our bodies are built, we can generate significantly more force with much less energy using a striking motion than with a thrust. So under the duress of combat, it would probably be easier just to(as you said) keep swinging until there's no more targets
Hence the existence of swords meant for chopping rather than slicing. Not to mention swords very good at detaching limbs. Which explains the existence of Kopis, Makhaira, Falcata, Dadao, Konda Sword, and Ngulu Sword.
The Spanish used to fight with a rapier sword accompanied by a Biscayan dagger (thick as a broadsowrd and 56×14 cm, aprox) in the other hand. What do you think about?
With the examples you have there... they're training and applications would have overlapped and not been to dissimilar. And allowed for the formality of dueling to be applied to the chaos/melee of war. I think.
One reason that might apply with a lot of rapiers is the length and inconvenience of wearing. It might seem like in a battlefield context the latter might be tolerated more for reach advantage due to a higher chance of actually using the weapon compared to civilian wear, but in the same context the sword is usually also not the main weapon. They'd often already have a very far-reaching polearm, so the extra reach of most rapiers compared to most broadswords might be a bit redundant. And when you have to resort to the sword, it's usually when your opponent got very close anyway. Not to mention, in the quick and chaotic action, having to run around and move in different kinds of environments, the inconvenience of wearing the rapier and getting caught on things might in some ways be even more of a problem than in civilian life.
In addition to all sorts of inconvenient stuff happening in war to a sword and the person wielding, it is worth noting that hacking/slashing is what the first caveman would have done with a sword (a lunge is a comparatively complex technique, besides the directional commitment etc mentioned): so in a melee at some point tunnel vision is likely to set in with the caveman program taking over and a broader sword just accounts for that.
I've seen swords like this that have been described as a riding sword, issued to the military as a sort of military variant of a rapier, but I don't have a trained eye to tell for sure if this is one of those swords. I'm really here to see why people used this in war over the rapier, and I have some ideas like the option to cut, but I wonder if there are any other reasons.
I didn't put much research into it, but I've known early on that the rapier wasn't a battlefield weapon, but one of gentlemen as a light self-defense tool in an environment when armour is not worn in daily life. As much as a fashion statement, a battlefield blade was rather heavy to carry around when you are likely not to need it everyday. The design is kinda self-explaining but all your points help to educate others new to Western swords.
Would a rapier with sort of "lugs" like you see in boar spears be good then? You could even sharpen them as a sort of pick, giving more options for the rapierist. It would likely throw the balance out of whack, though.
I've thought about this too. That and leaf shaped tips on rapiers. There are hunting spear-swords or boar-swords, but I haven't heard of them being used in a sword fighting context.
Having barbs on the blade would be counterproductive for a couple reasons. 1. it wouldn't go into the scabbard well. 2. you would bind out on the blade where your leverage is crap. 3. as you said the balance would be strange. 4. It would get snagged on stuff. But those are just my thoughts.
Interesting side note you mentioned is falling over. With regard to clothing and armour. Ask any motorcyclist, it's a huge benefit to be able to fall on hard ground without injury. Even modern soldiers sometimes have knee and elbow pads. Being able to hit the ground without injury keeps you in the fight and not become a liability to your team mates.
Cup-hilt still isn't one of my more preferred war sword hand guards due to weight distribution and generally not being one of the sturdier hand guard types.
You forgot to mention that wider, thicker blade tips may require a bit more strength to pierce, but will be far, FAR deadlier once it gets just a single cm into a human's body. Thick and wide blades leave bigger wounds. Bigger wounds equal more bloodloss, higher chance to hit organs and a bigger area for infections to grow. A rapier thrust could easly be dealt with wrapping some clean cloth around it and maybe wash it with clean water. A thrust from a broadsword may require bigger cloth or even bandages, quick treatment and also probably something to disinfect the wound.
How would you compare the Bilbao with an Italian Falchion that has a swept-hilt like guard? No doubt the Bilbao would be a better thruster than the Falchion even if not the most practical with the weight the cup-hilt adds. However the Falchion is the stronger chopper and there's the added benefit of some made in Italy having a more Rapier like protection. There's also Spanish Pirate Swords from 1670 that have shell guards.
This kind of broadswords were indeed used extensively by cavalry. Or at least seems that way. Cavalry troopers and officers up to the Napoleonic Wars apparenlty used these. Hussars and Dragoons employed sabres but while the dragoons eventually shifted towards straight blades they went for basket hilted swords with a half basket and a thumb ring
All good points. Same with oriental blades, the slash and hackers are more battlefield melee in the mud weapons, whereas the stabbers are assassin specialist blades, whether we're talking jian, dao, tulwar, shaska, it's all the same, physics is physics. In Chinese, "assassin" is literally "he who stabs". Sabres were called, "the gall of one hundred soldiers", whereas straight two edged swords were called "the pride of princes". One easily overlooked point, as what was formerly called common sense is now today called, uncommon sense, we may easily observe modern professional career soldiers and even enthusiasts and militia men, I know many people who own guns and modern weapons, I can't think of a single twit who owns only a single weapon. A tool is a tool, and every single tool is purpose specific. Good point on the broadsword has superior 'stopping' power ie keep them at range ability in the event of stabbing. It's bed time and I'm tired so I'll only list 2 without ado that your polished presentation missed: 1. A broad sword can hack a leg, not cut, hack, if not clean off, at least deep enough to put them out of commission, which, considering good upper body armour and how most men even athletic and muscular men who can handle themselves, are clumsy with their legs, coupled with most suits of armour meticulously protect beetle-like the torse, but do nothing for the femoral artery, yeah, cut them off at the knees, smite them hip and thighs, is an ancient custom provably going back at least 5100 years. A broadsword thus at least doubles your targets of opportunity and angle of approach. Less so in 'hema' or melee combat, but still exists and there are historical recorded examples, we easily see in mma vale tudo mala yudha pankration etc, or just street fights, that people readily "drop levels" or go from high, to suddenly switching to low to take out the legs. A broad sword can do that, a rapier cannot. 2. I reckon you failed to mention that just as today, true skill is rare, so too as well in ancient times, true skill was rare. The speed of a rapier is not easily appreciated by armchair philosophy. Every twat knows the E=MC2 squared, what they don't know unless they've practiced some cutting, is that aside from target selection and of course practice and skill, there's only 2 factors in physics that increase the penetration of the payload of keen kinetic energy, the weight of the instrument, the velocity at which it travels, ie, a heavy blade, or its speed. As today, not everyone who owns a weapon is a master at it, owning a piano doesn't make you Mozart, owning a blade or a firearm doesn't make you anybody except a potential donor. Rapiers were indeed used on the battlefield precisely because they are lighter to carry and more gentlemanly or comfortable as well as in the hands of a true master, not only 'just' as deadly, no sir, far more so, due to the speed. History is replete with countless examples of inferior armaments and inferior numbers taking victory over superior numbers and armaments. People have forgotten berserker means baresarker, no armour, for indeed, the best defense is pure offense. Gun fighters in the West learned in the expensive academy of experience in dear-bought wisdom as Kipling put it, "It's not about being fast, it's about being willing.", something copious volumes have been written about in Vedic and Japanese texts, and thought the Spartans didn't write much, they practiced it, Ev-thanatos, euthanasia, a beautiful death, just come get me, any cunt who dares. 'Course it'll cost 'ya. Thin blades with skill and speed cut exceptionally well, generally with the point not edge, and though not as deep as heavier blades, more than deep enough. No they cannot hack limbs off, but a carotid, jugular, brachial, radial, brain stem cerebral coretex, presents no problem. Yes, they have less durability. But they have superior mobility, and with skill, superior offensive capabilities, so yes, they were indeed used on the battlefield. Not everyone is a meistre, maestro, master. A cumbersome chopper then is more suited for a boar, whereas a slim blade that can easily target exposed flesh, and no matter how much armour someone wears, a metacarpel, a patella, these are small things that are instant fight finishers, relies more on speed, offense, and mobility. A tool is a tool and neither a broad sword nor rapier nor any other tool, will jump up off the table and go do your job for you. The man is the weapon, or the meat, ergo doubt and doughty have ever been cognate heterography. Both blades can kill and have different abilities, but it is rather bare and plain, that with a skill curve, the rapier is favoured, and dashing, in more ways than one. One more useful tactic of the rapier is that a skilled swordsman taunts, baits and literally dares a heavier broadsword wielder to pit his weight and might against it to smash through, thereby opening the broadsword wielder up to ripostes and strikes of opportunity that overzealousness deserves.
From seeing swords at museums I had the missconception that the "Bilbo sword" was the "standard spanish rapier" (ropera) and absolutely made up that the typical rapier was more of a "french standard" probably influenced by Mr Dumas and his musketeers 😂
im no expert but tl;dr curved points don't thrust as well as straight ones. They follow through in the direction of the curve instead of straight-through, and break more easily.
Wonderful video! Probably the only thing to add is the concept of weapon system…. With the rapier we have a dagger that is excellent at countering many of the issues mentioned…. For a long time shields were very important in war. Rapier isn’t always superior to polearms, even in a duel, so a lot of this is cultural…. Guns are often paired with swords, weight of the weapon system is always an issue
In spanish "ropera" translated to english means something like "Dressable" or "wearable", the reason of this name is that sword was not intended to be used for war but for civilian self defence use. This name was foneticaly adapted by french to the word " rapier" and taken by english too. The name "Bilbo" is the basqe name of the city that in castelain we name "Bilbao". this city has been famous during centuries for the high quality swords made there and exported to several countries in Europe and the whole world. Since every blade made in Bilbo had engraved the mark "Bilbo" on it, is a mistake to use this name to an unique type of sword, because there where a lot of diferent models of blades made in Bilbo that where exported to a different places and mounted in different types of guards. There's a RUclips channel from a serious expert in swords and knives called "Antiguo acero español" where you can find very good information about this theme and several more, the videos are in spanish but can use the "cc" button
The versatility of attack and defence options, together with its robustness, are clear winners for the broadsword in a battle. And if you do break/damage the point of a broadsword, you still hold a very capable weapon - not so the rapier.
I saw in that video with Tod that 17th C. Spanish soldiers were issued rapiers. But it was known at the time that rapiers weren't ideal for melees. Why did they issue them to infantrymen? Did it have something to do with pike warfare? That perhaps after getting through the push of pikes youd have a smaller handheld pike in your hand?
Well, I believe Matt’s point is that both classic rapier and bilbo sword were used in warfare of that period. I have some serious doubts that Spanish tercios were issued thrusting rapiers exclusively. It wouldn’t be their primary weapon, so any sort of mandatory uniformity on this is questionable.
Certainly not all Spanish infantrymen were issued rapiers (in the sense of long, thin, thrust-centric blades). There are many those "Bilbao" or "Bilbo" swords with shorter broad blades and cup or shell hilts in Spanish museums and armouries. They were often manufactured for armouries and for noblemen who were assembling their units and equipping their ships. I would say that those swords were common among soldiers while rapiers were less common. But the Spanish sources usually do not call them "rapiers" and "broadswords". Just "swords". It's "espada de taza" or "espada de conchas", "cup-hilted sword" or "shell-hilted sword" and you need further description or to see the blade to know what it is. This means there is a lot of space for misinterpretation and for getting lost in translation, since it's easy to just translate "espada de taza" as "cup-hilted rapier" and the reader might assume it had long thin blade, while the original source is not indicating it directly. There might have been some Spanish commanders who really issued their units with rapiers and not broadswords - i don't want to dispute that totally - but I suggest to be very careful about interpreting what was written down. There surely were many individual soldiers who decided to carry rapier on the battlefield. Besides the topic of how useful it might be on the battlefield, there is also the important topic of fashion, prestige and representation. (There were many Spanish lesser noblemen from often quite poor families - the hidalgos - for whom becoming professional soldier was an honourable way to earn living, not only in cavalry and among officers but also among the infantry. The rapier as "the gentleman's sword" might have been the choice because of those social reasons too.) I think that in the "pike and shot warfare", in the Tercio, the choice of sidearm is not such an important issue. We may argue that broader cutting blade is more useful - and the prevalence of broadswords, messers, sabres, dusacken and other types of shorter and wider "hangers" among the European infantry of Thirty years war is suggesting that our idea is correct. (Many of those soldiers also weren't especially trained in the art of sword or rapier, they practiced with pikes and firearms, and short cutting blades are more intuitive to use.) But rapier, in the hands of somebody who was very well familiar and educated with it, surely wasn't completely useless. I'm unable to answer the question "did they chose a rapier because they deemed it more powerful, or did they chose a rapier because they deemed it more cool" but I think this is the main question of this discussion.
@michaldudas7174 I appreciate the response, but Matt literally holds a long thin nearly thrust-only rapier and said they were manufactured for pikemen and musketeers. And yes, I'm aware hangers were the go to sword for foot soldiers during pike and shot. In fact, it's one fo the few times in history where every combatant has a sword.
@@leofedorov1030 That's what I would have thought, but if you watch that video, Matt holds what appears to be a dueling weapon and points out how it was manufactured for pikemen and musketeers.
@@mattmiraglia3199 I think you are interpreting this too literally. It is largely believed that various styles were used both by infantry and by cavalry. There is no evidence that soldiers were pressured or let alone ordered to carry a sidearm with a very specific style of blade: single edged, double edged, no edge, specific blade length and width etc. There is no consensus btw that bilbo sword is not a rapier. The term rapier itself is rather ambiguous.
Matt, since you brought it up that people still want to call it a rapier, can you use the broadsword you have with a rapier fencing system? And by that I mean use it well enough against a rapier.
If guns had never been invented we'd still be having the debate what sword was better in various situations. The point about stopping power sounds exactly like the caliber debate. 9mm guys would then be carrying rapiers saying "thrust placement is all the matters" then the .45 guys would use broadswords saying "big blade makes a big hole."
People are still having the "what sword is better in what situations" even though fire arms were invented. You haven't noticed even though you watch at least this sword channel?
Sidesword: "You could not live with your own failure. Where did that bring you? Back to me.".
Where is this quote from?
😂 perfect
@@jhstylewon1172 It's from one of those Avengers movies.
@@jhstylewon1172 Thanos said that .
@@jhstylewon1172 Endgame Thanos
One thing in the stopping power department: A wider blade makes a wider wound channel, even with a thrust. Blades kill by exsanguination and a wider wound channel lets more blood out in less time. When your opponent is trying to kill you, the sooner he stops the better you will like it.
Well, in the cut, they can also kill by your opponent’s insides becoming their outsides, in the case of the head or gut.
@@farkasmactavish Which goes to the point of greater versatility that he was making. The other thing is that cuts, even when they're not fatal will disable an opponent more quickly, a life saving feature when he's trying to let your own insides outside.
@@stevehorton621 Right, but I was contradicting "blades kill by exsangunation", which is true but not the only true statement ab how blades kill.
@@farkasmactavish correct. Blood loss is the ultimate killer but there's so many weak points that a cutting blade can target better. And even if it isn't fatal, like said in the video, a severed hamstring and similar is essentially an end to the fight, at least if there is enough space for the opponents to fall back into. I guess it depends a lot on the era but soldiers didn't always slaughter each other down to the last man.
Thank you captain obvious.
That broadsword needs to be added to your collabs with Windlass Mat!!
Better even the later model, the one with 2 shells called Boca de Caballo
Sadly I reckon the hilt might be a little complicated for that. Who knows though, I mean windless could probably make them I just doubt the price point would be great
If you do want one there's a scottish company called Armourclass which specialise in basket hilts. They're great, I have a rapier from them and it's brilliant
@@Zilegil thanks for the info! I allways wanted a Spanish broadsword to match with my spear and flintlock (too many Comanches in my backyard)
Indeed!
Anti-grappling . . . I keep thinking of that final fight in Rob Roy.
Your point about Stopping Power needed to include the fact that cuts don't always hit flesh. In those cases a light, narrow rapier would sting and leave a bruise; but a blade with more mass stands a chance of breaking a bone and thus rendering the opponent less combat effective.
Being as most rapiers were just as heavy as broadswords of the era, this isn't really a distinguishing factor. Rapier blades are long and rigid, but they aren't light like a smallsword. The point of balance and percussion may be further from the point on a rapier, but as period broadswords were also designed for thrusting they also weren't the best choppers.
@@colbunkmust Well, if depends. If you use a broadsword balanced for horseback, cutting the force of a horse and the POB even more forward cus the ideal for swordplay is calvary combat isn't exactly fencing, I bet it could. Stocatta has some examples of early Scottish broadswords and with seven to inch point of balances. Thegnthrand has several were he breaks cinderblock and ribs through mail and padding. It is isn't the most energy efficent way to put a man down, but it had be effective. Another think I would say if that is military setting, I would person is more to likely to not have to defend themself against things which would break a blade, a person would use a blade in ways which put more stress of the weapon.
@@PJDAltamirus0425 "cus the ideal for swordplay is calvary combat isn't exactly fencing"
All combat with swords is "fencing" regardless of what type of sword or how it is being used. I get what you're trying to say, but I'm very much opposed to promoting the idea that "fencing" is just one type of sword combat. It isn't.
You made some fine points, but rapiers vary in size and dimension as well as broadswords. I wasn't saying you can't break some bones with a broadsword, but the scenarios where you break bone but also don't cut someone aren't going to be very high and the most likely scenarios for breaking bones would also be scenarios where a rapier would do the same, i.e. a strike against a hand. The big advantage of the broadsword is still very much its cutting capacity, not its bludgeoning capability.
@@colbunkmustThe fact that the weight of a rapier is in the hand and not the blade means that when you whack somebody with the blade, it's necessarily transferring less force.
@@farkasmactavish Yes, but I already addressed this. The difference isn't going to be tremendous between the two as the hilt designs are usually similar.
And also assuming the rapier is heavily thrust focused, it's going to have a longer blade so even if the point of percussion is further back from the point, there's still a bunch of mass at a similar distance from the hilt.
The point regarding stopping power is a good one. It is relatively easy for a narrow sword to pass all the way through an opponent and not hit anything critically important. When you want your opponent to stop trying to stab you, especially when stabbing through their torso, a wider stab is going to be much more likely to hit a major artery or something else vital. Cutting more deeply is also more likely to disable a limb or cause more significant bleeding. People who are injured do not instantly fall down and die like in the movies, and the degree of disability a wound causes is important to surviving the encounter; it's pretty common for both the "winner" and "loser" of knife fights to end up in the hospital and 17th century medicine left a lot to be desired. There are parallels to the concept of stopping power in firearms: pistol rounds lack sufficient energy to cause shockwaves which damage tissue around the wound, and act in many ways like little rapier stabs. It's not until you add the kind of energy rifles can impart to a bullet that you see significant shockwave effects, and explains why pistol rounds more often than not fail to disable a person even when hit in the head and center-torso.
I agree with your overall point, which is correct from wound assessment standpoint.
That being said, please be so kind and educate yourself to dispense with the "schockwave" myth, as no such thing exists. I refer you to study the conclusions of the works of Dr. Fackler as you can google them under International Wound Ballistics Association Review particularly issue no5 part 2.
Further on channel Primary & Secondary Modcasts Return of DocGKR (Dr. Gary Roberts - one of 3 late Dr. Fackler's successors)
Also Modcast on Terminal Ballistics (next eg modcast on headshots and pelvic girdle shots). Those are valid sources that done only valid research in the field of Wound Ballistics accessible to non-LE/mil personel like two of us.
They researched both inflicting various wounds via various projectile constructions and treatment of said wounds.
Even exceeding up to Mach7 projectile speed no permanent dmg was imparted via temporary strech of soft tissues (aka schockwave) and only relevant tissue dmg is the one directly done by the physical body of the bullet and crushed tissue in its wound channel or by unstable bullet being upset in tissue - thus only realiable wounding mechanism of bullet same as sword is hit to biologicaly important structure - heart (10-30sec timer) OR brain stem - instant switch off, decapitation). Other injurries are giving the adversary to vote if he wants to continue or not in the fight.
End of walloftext, sorry. Hope that helps.
+][+
Also, rifle rounds fragment. This is how a hip shot can exit out the side of the neck. Purple heart recipients have shown some amazing wounds.
Overpenetration also means that your weapon might stuck in your opponent's body pretty much disarming you while his buddies are coming for you
Carry a main gauche
Not just that. Todd Cutler's latest shows then finding an arrow shaft inextricably jammed in chainmail.
It's a sword not a harpoon. Swords get stuck in people in the sense that you have to draw them from your target to continue to attack. This isn't a sword in the stone.
@@aaftiyoDkcdicurak in a battlefield any time you lose is against you, your opponents won't "give you a sec "
If you notice modern bayonets are shorter and wider than their early 20th century counterparts for that exact reason, stuck between the reabs for example and your will be exposed until your weapon is unstuck
This was touched on in a fantasy novel I read way back. One character scolds another, "You stab a guy, the first six inches will kill him. The extra *yard* doesn't really help."
I think I read another point about stopping power summed up in John Silver. A thrust to a lot of areas doesn't kill or disable someone full of adrenaline before they can attack you back. A cut from a Broadsword, however, will disable pretty much anywhere you hit like the arm, because the force is distributed enough to stop their motion while doing serious immediate damage to muscle and tendons.
Another point about armor besides damage to the weapon. In the 16/17th century, it was pretty common for soldiers to be wearing cuirass with arms and legs unarmored or less armored. A thrust or cut isn't likely to do much against a cuirass. But it is easier to hit arms and legs with cuts.
Yep. In the "real" saber fencing it is not that difficult to slash at the transitioning from a parry. With rapier this is pretty useless, with saber it may destroy your opponent mobility, in a melee this means you can move on another target,
I like the over penetration point. Sure, a broader blade might not penetrate as deeply or as easily, but people aren’t generally THAT thick. I think the FBI penetration standard for bullets into ballistic gel is between 12-18” to ensure sufficient depth to hit vitals from any angle. From most angles where a stab would come from, that’s probably more than is needed. That’s not a hard and fast rule, of course, but you certainly don’t need to get 40” of blade all the way through a torso if 12” gets them just as dead.
In the old days in my country there was the general belief that any blades longer than " four fingers" is life threatening
Actually some police officers still use the four finger rule, although there is no legal basis for that
And it's kinda hard to find bigger folding, survival and other knifes longer than that with the only exception being kitchen knives since most people want to be on the safe side of things
0:36 I don't think people called it rapier for the cup hilt, i think is because the spanish called a ropera and when you translate that into english is rapier.
"who would decide to duel in a confined space?"
the french. Specifically Colonel Barbier-Dufai and Captain Raoul de Vere had a duel to the death in the back of a carriage while tied together by their left arms.
Thats some next level brutality right there.What was the offence they dueled about?
That is terrifying. Let me guess, they each only had a rock in their right hand?
With daggers, over Raoul's drip getting insulted.
Let me guess, they both won/lost?
@@Adros2121 Please clarify "drip" in this context - his girlfriend? Gonorrhea?
I'm quite glad you are covering spanish swords. I wondered why you didn't, given that spanish Steel and the spanish military have been quite relevant in european history. I'm no historian, hema practitioner or sword enthusiast, so I have no clue why spanish treatises were not spoken about and so on.
Maybe the cultural isolation of the spanish peninsula, which at some point turned their back on Europe?
Great channel, thx!
Ya es sorprendente que hablen de espadas españolas. Y este caballero es verdaderamente un maestro. Sobre los tratados de esgrima y escuelas, bueno, siempre se deja de lado la tradición española y su importancia. Aunque los españoles llevaron a la Italia del Renacimiento su esgrima prevaleciendo sobre italianos y franceses, y luego sobre otros ejércitos europeos en el siglo XVII. Te recomiendo de Benedetto Croce “España en la vida italiana del Renacimiento” a propósito de los ‘jaqués’, los espadachines españoles que llevó César Borgia a Roma y la impronta que dejó el ejército español en aquellos tiempos terribles y emocionantes, lo que se decía de ellos, para bien y para mal. No es cuestión de que España “diera la espalda a Europa”, las razones están en otra parte.
Se conocían, pero obviamente es un canal de habla inglesa por lo que prioriza la historia de su país y los que mejor relación han tenido con el suyo. El tratado más relevante en relación con las espadas roperas son los de "Verdadera destreza".
@@nobodyexpectssi4654 Las razones son la leyenda negra, No es casualidad que las peliculas de los años de dominio español se centran en piratas. Se trata de evitar hablar de los periodos históricos en los que los ánglos no eran el ombligo del mundo como ahora. Por cierto la ropera se desarrollo por primera vez en España e Italia (cuyas ciudades principales eran parte de España). Tampoco hay películas de los tercios que inventaron la guerra moderna con armas de fuego, los vikingos que saqueaban Inglaterra se demonizaron etc. Y lo que es peor, los españoles nos avergonzamos de nuestra propia historia por el simple hecho de no querer parecernos a un dictador nacionalista. Si un país no respeta su historia, que no espere que un enemigo histórico le haga justicia.
@@MiguelMartinez-tn1vu Spain has one of the best ancient weapons and armour museums in the World ! I was lucky enough to get a personal guided tour when I came from Australia, even though the Royal Armoury Museum was closed for renovations. The Curator was very proud of the items on display there !
@@MiguelMartinez-tn1vu A mí, francamente, lo que piensen los demás me es indiferente. Como decía Alonso Quijano; “Yo sé quién soy”. ¿Un dictador nacionalista? Venga ya
Nicely summarized. Cut and thrust.
Yes, OK, but what did they use for dungeon delving? We demand answers!
Obviosly, double edged axes. C'mon.
Since we're entering the realm of fiction, may as well throw in both real weapon designs and fictional designs.
There's the 1833 Spanish Naval Cutlass, Armor Venue Royal Navy 1804 Pattern Cutlass, Bardiche Axe, 16th Century German or French Battle Axe, Zulu Winged War Axe, Mambele Knife-Axe, Dragonpike (Fire Emblem), Wyrmslayer Sword (Fire Emblem), Dragon Axe (Fire Emblem), Levin Sword (Fire Emblem), Netherite Sword (Minecraft), Netherite Axe (Minecraft), Master Sword (The Legend of Zelda), Gilded Sword (Zelda), Magical Sword (Zelda), Great Fairy's Sword, Fire and Light Arrows, Fire Rod (Zelda), Fire Flower (Super Mario), Tanooki Suit (Super Mario), Hammer Suit (Super Mario), Skull Hammer, Megaton Hammer...
Ji polearm, Qinglong Ji, Yari, European one-handed spear, Arming Sword, Spatha, European Long Sword, Short Bow, Atlatl, Pulwar, Shamshir, Bowie Knife, Negrito Bolo Knife, Japanese Meiji Artillery Sword, Shashka Saber, 1889 British Sergeant's Saber, 1856 Pioneer Hanger Sword, Yanling Dao, Woyao Dao, Chokuto, Kopis, Seiryu and Kiryu longer length knives, Japanese styled Tanto, two-handed war hammer, Kris Sword, Flamberge, Khyber Sword, and Visayan Barong.
@@tidepoolclipper8657 I didn't read all of that, but thanks, pal.
If we go by „they“ as the real people of that age, I would argue that „they“ would have used pretty much the weapon he shows here. This type of weapon was after all used in the Americas (aka the frontier), on ships, while riding and in war, so it’s pretty much the allrounder of side arms. So definitely the weapon „they“ would have chosen for any unpredictable and dangerous situation like a dungeon. After that other weapons to take along probably depend on how lightweight „they“ wanted to go as a heavier weapon or a crossbow could go nicely with the bilbo sword.
Bottom line: in 16th century take this weapon as it’s at least ok in most situations.
If Matt ever wants to work on an RPG then I would love to help with that 😊
I am Amalgamated Research Gaming Hub and my Heroes & Henchmen RPG is a licenced derivative of K&C's old Hackmaster 4e (HM4E)
Something you rarely ever mention: A broader point is dealing more internal damage.
A stab from a gladius is much worse than from a slender rapier. Partially because a broader point can be sharpened to a much higher degree.
It's like a difference between being cut with a shaving razor and stepping on a nail. A sharp razor may produce a barely perceptible cut, yet it keeps on bleeding seemingly forever, while when you step on a nail you are worried that despite it penetrating very deeply, it hardly bleeds at all, which increases the chance for an infection.
The British 1804 and 1845 Cutlass also have strong tips that can do plenty.
This was literally a whole point on my list of 5 😂
@@scholagladiatoria This "stopping power" thing? Maybe I didn't get it, but it looked like you emphasized a different aspect of it.
The way you put it, it seemed like "rapier would be better at thrusting, but the guy might still end up in shanking range".
The way I put it is: "it might be easier to *score* a point with a rapier, but it's much worse to be stabbed by a broader and sharper point".
Similarly, when dealing with polearms, it seemed like you put more emphasize on being able to defend with a sword, than on effective offense.
I think that being able to snipe the hand which holds the polearm with a quick cut is more important than a slightly increased chance of parrying a thrust. The other guy knows it, so he keeps his hands away, or grabs a longer spear, which slows him down.
@@tidepoolclipper8657 However, XIXth century sabers have a reputation of being dull... ;-)
It depends more on if they were service shapened or nor. As delivered from manufacturer and recieved and put in armoury, the were not donewith final edge. That being put on only when war was declared and your unit deployed and specificaly order: Sharpen the swords!
was given.
+][+
4:47 at the Battle of Lützen Swedish cavalry armed with Rapiers where able to break imperial pikesquares.
At the battle of Breitenfelde imperial cavalry were able to copy this tactic and break swedish pikesquare.
I mean, in the battle of Lutzen the Swedish cavalry used guns to dominate the imperial pike squares and imperial sword cavalry. Either pointy sword would have worked, it was their combined arms that made the difference.
@johnandrewserranogarcia7223 you're true they Had both. But they were able to do the Impossible, breaking pikesquares charging sword in handwhich we're considered invinceable by cavaly
Assuming you are translating "värja" to rapier: many swords that are in Swedish called värja are not very thrust centric like the rapiers we think of. Some Swedish "värja" were quite similar to cavalry swords from other parts of Europe, with a pretty wide blade and sometimes a thumb ring instead of finger rings.
18th century värja used by Carolus Rex's soldiers are also quite broad and cut.
@@atom8248 In german literature about The 30 Years War the swords used by the Cavalry of Gustav Adolphus are considered Rapiers like their counterparts used by the Cavalry in the Imperial Army. Because both Designs were thrust centric.
In the 18th century Cavalry swords used in Central Europe were although broader and of a Cut and Thrust design
Man... I LOVE those cup hilts! So beautiful!
This is why I keep saying that comparing rapier vs katana is not a good comparison, because one is a thrust-centric weapon designed for civilian duel, and the other is a cut-centirc weapon designed for wartime combat. A better comparison would be saber vs katana, or in this case a bilbo vs katata. The dueling setting in civilian life is very different from the scrable of wartime combat.
@@KenoticMuse A Katana or rather the Uchigatana (in Japan Katana just means single edged sword and doesn't need to be japanese, it can be a western saber for instance, while what we westerners call a katana is really the Uchigatana) is mainly civilian use sword that still got used in War as a backup weapon to Bow and spear. But it most often was the courtly arms and everyday status symbol Samurai wore. As such it is a good parallell to the sidesword. Although indeed not in function as you point out.
The Tachi is the War Sword that preceeded it that was an actual main weapon of War, although it too often was used secondarily to bow and spear.
The Tachi is designed to be worn with Armor, is longer and more curved and is worn suspended at two points with edge down horizontally at the side to not be in the way in armor on horseback.
@@thunder2434 I don't think katana was used mainly as civilian sword, but the answer depends on the period setting. For example, in periods of peace and there's no war, then the katana wouldn't be worn in battle, and it would used in civilian setting. However, to my understanding, the katana was used in combat setting (whenever there was a war) up until at least 16th century. Then, during the peace time of the Edo period, the katana started to be used mainly as civilian status symbol, because obviously there was not a lot of "war" to fight in.
@@KenoticMuse Yes, I meant in the Edo period.
Uchigatana did indeed exist before this and back then was a battlefield weapon alongside the Tachi. It became popular in later eras but existed earlier and I meant when it was dominant as a sword. You're right the timeframe you pick is important to the use of it. Sorry about that.
Or I may as well just be wrong at this point. I was just trying to be helpful. Just disregard all I posted.
You are both somewhat correct: the tachi was used as the secondary weapon to the bow and spear (not backup weapon: backup weapon means you would use it if plans go awry, but not if things go according to plan; secondary weapon means you wouldn't use it in the beginning of the battle and use something else instead, which would be your primary weapon, but you would fully expect to deploy it at some point during the battle), both on horseback and on foot, and is the older weapon from which uchigatana descended, and both coexisted for a while, but eventually, when foot combat became more common than mounted combat, the uchigatana became the more widely used secondary weapon.
The tachi never truly went out of use before the sengoku era ended and the edo era began, but its use had become much less common than the uchigatana by that point, restricted mostly to the cavalry and mounted infantry.
After the sengoku era ended and the edo era began, however, it was the uchigatana that would go on to become the samurai's primary weapon, because now, they were no longer soldiers of war who were expected to fight both on horseback and on foot, but law enforcers and bureaucrats who would usually operate on foot, both outdoors and indoors, but their lives were not very peaceful despite no ongoing open wars: there were outlaws and bandits of all kinds in all sorts of places, assassination attempts and honour duels; there would have been very few samurai in the edo period who never needed to kill another human being in violent conflict.
But we know that Katanas were worn regularly in peacetime as defensive weapons and rapiers were also carried in war and it's likely they were used against each other to a limited degree. It's not a bad comparison because the whole point of a comparison is to compare two completely polar opposite designs. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
Nice swords, both of them. Is the broadsword a sharp one? I mean, the rapier looks like it's for HEMA
Yes the broadsword is an antique and therefore edged, while the rapier in this video is a HEMA blunt.
That is a nice Antique example! I almost bought one that was like a Colichemarde small sword. It was a Spanish Cup Hilt Rapier, that had maybe a 2" wide blade at the cup for about a foot, then transitioned into a rapier blade. It is on Fagan Arms website, in their past items under Cup Hilt Rapier. Cheers!!!@@scholagladiatoria
6th point: Faster to draw. Dussacks even more so. Very relevant for musketeers when the lines close or defending a bastion.
I'd argue that's less relevant for war. You will almost always have time to draw unless you are on the front lines of an ambush, which would probably be with guns anyway.
Infantry men had long into 19th century a short sword in addition to polearm or musket/ rifle.
@@brittakriep2938 I think that has more to do with drawing in tight formations and fighting in close quarters than the actual speed of the draw.
@@brittakriep2938 Used for firewood.
@@NvrchFotia : Also think so.
To me it is like when (back in the day) NY City Police Officers carried a 2" barreled 5 or 6 shot revolver while off duty, but when on duty they switched over to a heavier 6 shot 4" barreled revolver. The light one for just in case social affrays, the heavy one with more punch for duty use.
I'd point out a possible overlap between two of your points: cuts and stopping power. You've said before that cuts have more stopping power than thrusts, and are more likely to disable an opponent instantly
Combine that with rapier's ability to cut an unarmored opponent vs the broadsword's increased mass allowing it to cut or stab through things like leather and fabric armor, assuming it's geometry allows.
So is a Broadsword just any double edged straight sword with a wide blade and a more enclosed hilt such as rapier and and basket style hilts? Like if they all had the same blade, would it be: Arming Sword = Crossguard, Sidesword = Addition of rings and partial complex hilt, Broadsword = full complex hilt or fully enclosed?
(Also I know its modern terminology, in the past calling a sword a broad sword, just meant it was broader that another sword)
Yes, that was the standard terminology for sword nerds until HEMA started getting up in arms about its ahistorical usage towards medieval swords. Broadsword is a term used in context of understanding in comparison to rapiers and smallswords and such.
But they also predate these weapons, and so HEMA nerds get mad when medieval swords are described as Broadswords, and that is not what they'd be called in the time before rapiers were introduced. Much like how you could describe any curved sword as a type of sabre, even if it is not European. However, someone very excited about their falchion might get a bit testy if you "reduce" it to a term that wasn't used to describe it.
@@MasoTrumoiit’s also just better in the modern age to be a bit more specific so people know what you’re talking about without having to describe it in detail every time.
In Germany, Bohemia and Poland the word is kord.
@@morriganmhor5078 germans and poles get all the cool words
Czech (Corona Regni Bohemiae) word Kord is derived from German term for Swept-hilt of sidesword - Korb (meaning basket).
1670+ heavy cavalry swords then being termed pallasch (Czech Palaš) in Holy Roman Empire lands and Poland. Sometimes Highland Baskethilt is also termed among the Scottish pallash here :)
+][+
Did you ever visit the Dutch Military Museum ? think you like their edged weapons part. Some interesting items from our 80-years war against Spain.
The broadword is superior on the retreat. If, for one instance, I'm pulling back I can keep doing that while still cutting/slashing. If thrusting is my only real way of hurting an opponent, then I'm forced into a movement opposite of the way I want to go. Another instance I can think of is obstacles: if you were fighting at a fence or short wall, or over a cannon, or whatever, the physical barrier is a significant obstacle for thrusting, while you can still hack and slash over the top of it with no problem.
You cannot get any cooler than this channel.
I was looking into the etymology of the rapier some time ago. There is a French word 'rapiere' which means 'grater', from 'rape' (pronounced 'rap-ay') which means 'to grate'. Because the hilts are aften perforated and look like culinary graters. This, I think is not the correct etymology as there is another etymology, which is from a Spanish word 'ropera' which was a clothes salesperson or wardrobe keeper. It would seem to be related to the English word 'wardrobe' to me. This Spanish term is a much more realistic and appropriate origin for this type of sword, I believe. Due to the fact that the word 'ropera' indicates that the rapier was primarily intended as a DRESS sword - rather than a robust military weapon. It would explain why the sword is lightweight, designed primarily for lightning quick thrust movements (therefore not good in melee as you point out), and they are often very highly decorated. To the point of being like 'fashion accessories', back in the day. Thought of in this manner, as primarily DRESS swords, your points are spot on (IMHO).
It is called a "ropera" sword because it was carried as an accessory to clothing, "ropa" means "clothes", generally used as a fashion accessory and as a weapon for dueling, personal defense and military use.
@@benicabanas9793 Yes that's pretty much what I was getting at.
@@benicabanas9793 an rapier is not for personal defense or military use. it's an dueling sword, sorry but having an extremely long, thin, one handed sword is not good for chaotic foot fighting.
In german the word Robe exists also , is currently rare used, means a kind of dated looking formal dress, for example black Robe used by judges and lawyers at court. But we german speakers call rapiers, smallswords, spadroons, sport epee, duel epee only Degen, sometimes even heavy cavallry swords are included, but not medieval swords, this are Schwerter ( plural).
@@stefthorman8548 In Spain at the time, any sword intended for dueling or dressing purposes, accompanying the clothing of a civilian (or a soldier in civilian clothes), was called a ropera, leaving, therefore, only purely military swords, with simple garrison, outside this denomination.
Excellent video! Thanks, Matt!
I guessed 5 reasons before actually watching the video and got them all right!
Another reason, derived from the broadswords cutting power, might have been to induce bleeding: a desperate man who has been run through and still has a blade stuck in him may be in pain and possibly dying, but if he's not bleeding he can probably keep going for a long time beyond exacting his revenge. With a broadsword, on the other hand, even a shallow stab would be much more catastrophic in the damaged area, causing bleeding and quicker weakening of the opponent.
good point: a duel, a rapier is more likely to hit first, but that duelist is also more likely to keep fighting. There's some pretty horrifying stories about duels with smallswords where both men kill each other: one gets impaled and still keep going to deal mortal wounds to his opponents. Or that gory dueling picture showing the men kebabing each other.
Single Target in controlled conditions vs. multiple Targets in rough conditions. The right Tool is always the key. :)
Thanks for clearing this up for me. I had similar preferences for stouter blades as being more warlike. I think that cleaving a person's arm off in a duel was frowned upon, hence a sticky weapon seemed more civilized.
Thrusts are way more deadly than cuts - according to the sources.
Your comment about why would anyone want to duel in a confined space reminded me of Mark Twain's (aka Samuel Clemens) story of being asked to set up a duel while he was traveling in Europe. In "Innocent's abroad" IIRC. Very funny of course.
"Administer your point to them" I love it! Must be a RUclips restriction not allowing "stab."
Nah, it sounds more like HEMA jargon
Hi! Thanks for that video - very informative.
Btw. You've got a lot of videos about weapons around all world, but... maybe you could make one about something called (in polish language) "Koncerz"? It's hard to pronounce in english and hard to get information about - in general it was thrust centric weapon from XVII century and as we know - it was only used by mounted soldier. If you could get somehow replica of that and tell what you think about that as duelling / infantry weapon because it looks like rapier / tuck but sabre hilted - it could be great!
OK, thanks by the way!
very thought revoking, thanks!
revoking...I don't know if I should compliment the wit or correct a blunder
Rapiers are also harder to pull out when needed, shorter weapons come out faster and easier, I have had plenty of times in 17th Century re-enactment when someone tries to pull out a rapier on me and my short dussack allows for faster action switching from pike to short weapons. They were almost always secondary weapons after muskets, pikes, pistols or polearms.
Playing a bunch of Hellish Quart against a friend who heavilly favors the Rapier (Marta more than Marie) so much of what your saying here seems to make sense, In an honorable duel the rapier is so hard to not get poked with (it might take 3 or more pokes though). Long guard just makes the stand off so big its really difficult to do very much of anything but once you get around that its a different story and on a battle field there wouldn't be much honorably standing directly in front of just one opponent.
Its obviously no subsitute for real knowledge but I can see how when going on to an actually battlefield choosing something with more blade mass as it were was a common choice. A first strike to deflect the blade then a follow up strike is a good stratergy which would seem like the sort of the thing battlefields would be rife with and the recent introduction of Maryna who has the Sabre and Kalkan provides an analog for the other battle field issue a rapier would face, sheilds. Its all extrapolation from the hema game sure but the lesson I have learnt is don't duel the rapier you'll ussually lose but once your in to a brawl/scrap a rapier user is in a much worse situation.
Another point to consider is the weapon's usefulness if it breaks. If a broadsword breaks, it essentially becomes a large knife, which can still be effective on the battlefield. In contrast, if a rapier breaks, it turns into an awkwardl toothpick.
One additional advantage the broad sword has is that when you stop thinking and start fighting from instinct, we hit things with the stick in our hand, not thrust. Every little kid has picked up a stick and started hitting things with it. When we get tired or injured, we naturally default to swinging, and a rapier is almost worthless in that situation.
Rapier is not worthless for cutting. You don't hold any of those 2 swords like a kid would hold a stick. That's sabre ;)
14:37 Despite the fact I always talk about weight, I think I'd much rather have a broadsword blade with a cup hilt in a civilian setting, than a rapier in a military setting. So if I could only afford one sword, better a Bilbao than a rapier.
Very interesting. Thanks for your lessons
Fun fact: the scabbards for the bilbao were called baggins
Thanks for the video 👍🏻
Id love a video that discusses the nuances and changes that modern material science adds to the picture. Like whats the preferable setup if we are talking solely using modern materials?
Have you heard about this new thing called a "gun?" It's gonna make rapiers AND broadswords obsolete!
More seriously, modern material science doesn't really change any of this. Only one of those five points is altered in any meaningful way, and while modern steel is somewhat more durable (and more reliably/consistently so) than period steel, it's not a huge difference in this context. Even modern rapiers aren't built to stand up to use in a cavalry charge, and so if you had modern materials and were planning a trip to a 17th Century battlefield, a modern rapier still might not be as good a choice as a modern broadsword.
@ his coverage on why sabers are still scene in the modern gun world were interesting. Ive always viewed this channel as the place to pretend they dont exist lol.
Are the big heavy contenders like great swords affected at all with compounds like carbotanium? i think thats how you spell it)
Polish cavalry sabers habitually minced Swedish ritters with their rapiers. For a serious thrusting by cavalry see Polish Hussars "koncerz" (kinda really long epee), but of course for melee they had their Hussar sabers ...
It's important to note that the Hussars had three types of swords, often carrying two of those three into battle: the szabla, the koncerz and the Palasz. Sabers, estocs and broadswords all different functions, and the role of the Hussar is to be able to fight many, many different types of soldier, riding to key points in the battle to exploit openings. You might turn from fighting a Akinci to an armored sipahi or an unarmored janissary or artilleryman all in quick succession. You could charge into a big press of Swedish or Russian Reiters, get the first wave with the lance, then kebab them with the koncerz, then start swinging the Nadziak around to cave in their heads. The idea was to be able to fight a lot of people, with a lot of variety.
@@Tareltonlives Quite true!
The Polish and Hungarian cavalry sometimes used long thrusting estoc swords, which are like rapiers but beefier very similar to ww1 cavalry swords.
"Koncerz" is the name of such sword.
Yes, but as I recall, they were "single-use" weapons. Thus it was expected that soldier delivers stab, run enemy through and leave weapon behind hoping to retrieve it after victorious battle from the corpse. Thus they had another weapon for the work after the 1st contact
@@mungo7136 Indeed, they usually carried broadswords and/or sabers, axes and hammers as well.
Another reason to use a broadsword over a thinner rapier is that the thrust wound will be wider and induce more shock and more instant bleeding. You'd die from the rapier minutes, hours or even days later from the same depth of wound that'd put you in instant shock and even death from bleeding out quickly from a broadsword.
This has several advantages.
For one if you wound an opponent they're out of the fight instead of skewering you as well even though they're mortally wounded from a thin blade.
For another, fighting multiple opponents you'd want to dispose of enemies quickly to then focus on the next opponent.
Now I'm not saying that you can't insta-kill an oponent with a rapier (throat, eye socket, heart or a major internal artery for instance) but there are many historical accounts of someone mortally wounding an opponent with a rapier, say run through the other fellows midsection and they in turn being skewered as well because the opponent didn't immediately fall down dead or even immediately incapacitated.
If it had been a wide blade that would probably end the fight instantly from shock and massive blood loss in seconds.
In case of thrust a good quality narrow blade perhaps better penetrates light armour, including modern vests.
@@brittakriep2938 Yeah. But you'd want something much shorter and stiffer than a rapier for that usually
@@Zilegil : You are right, forgotten the blade length, which can break.
Don't forget that they can cut while being inserted and pulled out...
Reminds me of the gladius and Shakan-era iklwa- big broad stabs for opening up a big wound, one right after the other.
I think the point of stopping power is really well thought. I have received thrusts with a long sword it spear that have put me on the ground, where as a fencing foil I need to pull myself back from running up it.
Love your uploads!
I feel like the final duel in Rob Roy is the best pop culture illustration of this. Rapier can wreck shop until broadswords annihilate.
Matt, would you say that the Munich Town Guard sword would fall into the broadsword category?
Sidesword, Haudegen, Reitschwert, Kord ... all terms describing it in areas it come from.
Agreed 100% Hence why I chose a rather chunky but shorter cut & thrust blade for my rapier. However tbh I prefer my saber & qama set over my rapier & left hand dagger. Yes the rapier has more protection etc but the saber paired with that gladius like short sword fits my style of fighting better. Plus they are easier to wear imo.
Camera angle made me see cup hilts in a completely different way. They look like you are holding a buckler shield with a long pointy bit.
as far as people having a dual in a confined space, im gonna broaden that to a fight in general rather than some sort of legal duel dispute.
if your primary weapon is a shorter one like a cinquedea and you like being up close and wrestling, you could use wrestling to throw a person in a wall. the wall can also protect from certain angles of cuts and minimizes where people can come from.
if the other person has a longer weapon, you have an advantage in confined spaces like trees and heavy foliage to give you more room for your cutting arcs.
On your 4th point on "stopping power" you missed other advantage for the wider blade would be it will also cause a larger possibly more debilitating wound track. 👍👍
One of the reasons foil targets are limited to the torso (and why academic fencing is limited to only the target over the opponents heart) is precisely an issue of stopping power. Unless you thrust directly into the heart, your opponent is not guaranteed to go down immediately, and any thrust outside the torso means you still have a fight ahead of you. Almost any thrust to the torso or throat is likely to be deadly eventually, but a cut to a limb tends to be far more debilitating (which is why arms are a legal target in saber)
could you do a video on the early & military rapiers; I want to have a fantasy on that is inspired by that & represent that for my D&D rouge. I imagion an adventure would need to take the same things into consterations as solgers but you & tod would know so much more!
Reading about the Conquistadors, the stories mention lopping off arms. Would their "rapier" be more like the rapier shown, or the broadsword blade?
Expanding a little on robustness: In a chaotic environment, like an active battle, the weapon is much more likely to encounter something hard. That's not necessarily just armor. Can shrapnel or even just concussion damage your weapon? What if a friendly soldier gets shoved into your way and whacks it with their weapon or just a piece of solid kit? Fragility is a very bad quality for any piece of equipment going into battle -- or even on campaign.
For all the reasons mentioned plus: a swordsman need not be particularly skilled with a slashing weapon to be effective and dangerous, whereas being effective with a thrust-only sword in the chaos of melee is significantly more difficult. Killing the opponent is not the bar either, or even necessarily the goal. Incapacitating the opponent is all that is necessary. And for that a slash is going to have much better odds, because you do not have to hit the head or torso-a slash to an arm or leg could take someone out of the fight. At worst, it would be enough distraction for you to finish them off with another blow.
By contrast, some rapier treatises demonstrate allowing your opponent to run your offhand through as a means of controlling their blade, presumably to set up a riposte that kills them.
How about epee? Its stiff enough for great thrusts, my fav after i find out how stiff they are.. hmmm interesting if its heavier or lighter then broadsword...
For anyone who knows... the plate showed in the thumbnail is from which fencing master? It looks Capoferro, but it's not from him.
It's always odd to me that anyone would not want a balanced cut-and-thrust blade except in very specific contexts. So often, the most natural follow up to a cut is a thrust, and the most natural follow up to a thrust is a cut. There are reasons in a duel or on horseback that versatility may not be as important. But, in the general case, I want a sword that is roughly equally good at cuts and thrusts.
Just looking at the two side-by-side, a broadsword also seems much better for defense as well as attack. A rapier's thin, relatively floppy blade does well against other blades of a similar construction but would fair very poorly against larger weapons, as you mentioned. A wider, thicker blade is more likely to block attacks from a wider variety of opposing weapons, something which a rapier would require a supplementary item like a buckler or a dagger to pull off the same maneuver.
I'm curious how that broadsword feels to hold/swing, because it looks HEAVY! A blade similar to an arming sword, plus that big beefy guard.
#6 The broadsword is better for less-lethal strikes, using the flat of the blade. That was especially important for home guard or constabulary use.
Don't know if anyone has said it yet, but in my mind the top reason you'd want a blade with cutting potential is basic biomechanics: our bodies are more naturally inclined to swing than poke when under stress.
If you look at how our bodies are built, we can generate significantly more force with much less energy using a striking motion than with a thrust. So under the duress of combat, it would probably be easier just to(as you said) keep swinging until there's no more targets
Hence the existence of swords meant for chopping rather than slicing. Not to mention swords very good at detaching limbs.
Which explains the existence of Kopis, Makhaira, Falcata, Dadao, Konda Sword, and Ngulu Sword.
The way you grip this swords makes swinging a bit awkward movement.
Broadswords are so cool man. I love the Scottish basket-hilted ones.
Ooh, and react to more duels from Alatriste, please ☺
The Spanish used to fight with a rapier sword accompanied by a Biscayan dagger (thick as a broadsowrd and 56×14 cm, aprox) in the other hand. What do you think about?
With the examples you have there... they're training and applications would have overlapped and not been to dissimilar. And allowed for the formality of dueling to be applied to the chaos/melee of war. I think.
One reason that might apply with a lot of rapiers is the length and inconvenience of wearing. It might seem like in a battlefield context the latter might be tolerated more for reach advantage due to a higher chance of actually using the weapon compared to civilian wear, but in the same context the sword is usually also not the main weapon. They'd often already have a very far-reaching polearm, so the extra reach of most rapiers compared to most broadswords might be a bit redundant. And when you have to resort to the sword, it's usually when your opponent got very close anyway. Not to mention, in the quick and chaotic action, having to run around and move in different kinds of environments, the inconvenience of wearing the rapier and getting caught on things might in some ways be even more of a problem than in civilian life.
So... Having an edge, might give you an edge?
In addition to all sorts of inconvenient stuff happening in war to a sword and the person wielding, it is worth noting that hacking/slashing is what the first caveman would have done with a sword (a lunge is a comparatively complex technique, besides the directional commitment etc mentioned): so in a melee at some point tunnel vision is likely to set in with the caveman program taking over and a broader sword just accounts for that.
Is there a video on advantages of rapier over broadsword?
have you talked about length?
With the broadsword you also have the concussion effect of the heavier blade, you might not get a cut but you might break a bone
I've seen swords like this that have been described as a riding sword, issued to the military as a sort of military variant of a rapier, but I don't have a trained eye to tell for sure if this is one of those swords.
I'm really here to see why people used this in war over the rapier, and I have some ideas like the option to cut, but I wonder if there are any other reasons.
I didn't put much research into it, but I've known early on that the rapier wasn't a battlefield weapon, but one of gentlemen as a light self-defense tool in an environment when armour is not worn in daily life. As much as a fashion statement, a battlefield blade was rather heavy to carry around when you are likely not to need it everyday. The design is kinda self-explaining but all your points help to educate others new to Western swords.
I'm new here, & you may have covered this, but doesn't the greater mass deliver more damage per blow?
Would a rapier with sort of "lugs" like you see in boar spears be good then? You could even sharpen them as a sort of pick, giving more options for the rapierist. It would likely throw the balance out of whack, though.
I've thought about this too. That and leaf shaped tips on rapiers. There are hunting spear-swords or boar-swords, but I haven't heard of them being used in a sword fighting context.
Having barbs on the blade would be counterproductive for a couple reasons. 1. it wouldn't go into the scabbard well. 2. you would bind out on the blade where your leverage is crap. 3. as you said the balance would be strange. 4. It would get snagged on stuff.
But those are just my thoughts.
Interesting side note you mentioned is falling over. With regard to clothing and armour. Ask any motorcyclist, it's a huge benefit to be able to fall on hard ground without injury. Even modern soldiers sometimes have knee and elbow pads. Being able to hit the ground without injury keeps you in the fight and not become a liability to your team mates.
Cup-hilt still isn't one of my more preferred war sword hand guards due to weight distribution and generally not being one of the sturdier hand guard types.
You forgot to mention that wider, thicker blade tips may require a bit more strength to pierce, but will be far, FAR deadlier once it gets just a single cm into a human's body. Thick and wide blades leave bigger wounds. Bigger wounds equal more bloodloss, higher chance to hit organs and a bigger area for infections to grow. A rapier thrust could easly be dealt with wrapping some clean cloth around it and maybe wash it with clean water. A thrust from a broadsword may require bigger cloth or even bandages, quick treatment and also probably something to disinfect the wound.
How would you compare the Bilbao with an Italian Falchion that has a swept-hilt like guard? No doubt the Bilbao would be a better thruster than the Falchion even if not the most practical with the weight the cup-hilt adds. However the Falchion is the stronger chopper and there's the added benefit of some made in Italy having a more Rapier like protection.
There's also Spanish Pirate Swords from 1670 that have shell guards.
This kind of broadswords were indeed used extensively by cavalry. Or at least seems that way. Cavalry troopers and officers up to the Napoleonic Wars apparenlty used these. Hussars and Dragoons employed sabres but while the dragoons eventually shifted towards straight blades they went for basket hilted swords with a half basket and a thumb ring
if not for the cup hilt that heavy blade would fit right in 11-1300's Italy or Spain. looks pretty nimble too.
Was there anything to do with cost?
All good points.
Same with oriental blades, the slash and hackers are more battlefield melee in the mud weapons, whereas the stabbers are assassin specialist blades, whether we're talking jian, dao, tulwar, shaska, it's all the same, physics is physics. In Chinese, "assassin" is literally "he who stabs". Sabres were called, "the gall of one hundred soldiers", whereas straight two edged swords were called "the pride of princes".
One easily overlooked point, as what was formerly called common sense is now today called, uncommon sense, we may easily observe modern professional career soldiers and even enthusiasts and militia men, I know many people who own guns and modern weapons, I can't think of a single twit who owns only a single weapon. A tool is a tool, and every single tool is purpose specific.
Good point on the broadsword has superior 'stopping' power ie keep them at range ability in the event of stabbing.
It's bed time and I'm tired so I'll only list 2 without ado that your polished presentation missed:
1. A broad sword can hack a leg, not cut, hack, if not clean off, at least deep enough to put them out of commission, which, considering good upper body armour and how most men even athletic and muscular men who can handle themselves, are clumsy with their legs, coupled with most suits of armour meticulously protect beetle-like the torse, but do nothing for the femoral artery, yeah, cut them off at the knees, smite them hip and thighs, is an ancient custom provably going back at least 5100 years. A broadsword thus at least doubles your targets of opportunity and angle of approach. Less so in 'hema' or melee combat, but still exists and there are historical recorded examples, we easily see in mma vale tudo mala yudha pankration etc, or just street fights, that people readily "drop levels" or go from high, to suddenly switching to low to take out the legs. A broad sword can do that, a rapier cannot.
2. I reckon you failed to mention that just as today, true skill is rare, so too as well in ancient times, true skill was rare. The speed of a rapier is not easily appreciated by armchair philosophy. Every twat knows the E=MC2 squared, what they don't know unless they've practiced some cutting, is that aside from target selection and of course practice and skill, there's only 2 factors in physics that increase the penetration of the payload of keen kinetic energy, the weight of the instrument, the velocity at which it travels, ie, a heavy blade, or its speed. As today, not everyone who owns a weapon is a master at it, owning a piano doesn't make you Mozart, owning a blade or a firearm doesn't make you anybody except a potential donor. Rapiers were indeed used on the battlefield precisely because they are lighter to carry and more gentlemanly or comfortable as well as in the hands of a true master, not only 'just' as deadly, no sir, far more so, due to the speed. History is replete with countless examples of inferior armaments and inferior numbers taking victory over superior numbers and armaments. People have forgotten berserker means baresarker, no armour, for indeed, the best defense is pure offense. Gun fighters in the West learned in the expensive academy of experience in dear-bought wisdom as Kipling put it, "It's not about being fast, it's about being willing.", something copious volumes have been written about in Vedic and Japanese texts, and thought the Spartans didn't write much, they practiced it, Ev-thanatos, euthanasia, a beautiful death, just come get me, any cunt who dares. 'Course it'll cost 'ya.
Thin blades with skill and speed cut exceptionally well, generally with the point not edge, and though not as deep as heavier blades, more than deep enough. No they cannot hack limbs off, but a carotid, jugular, brachial, radial, brain stem cerebral coretex, presents no problem. Yes, they have less durability. But they have superior mobility, and with skill, superior offensive capabilities, so yes, they were indeed used on the battlefield. Not everyone is a meistre, maestro, master. A cumbersome chopper then is more suited for a boar, whereas a slim blade that can easily target exposed flesh, and no matter how much armour someone wears, a metacarpel, a patella, these are small things that are instant fight finishers, relies more on speed, offense, and mobility. A tool is a tool and neither a broad sword nor rapier nor any other tool, will jump up off the table and go do your job for you. The man is the weapon, or the meat, ergo doubt and doughty have ever been cognate heterography. Both blades can kill and have different abilities, but it is rather bare and plain, that with a skill curve, the rapier is favoured, and dashing, in more ways than one. One more useful tactic of the rapier is that a skilled swordsman taunts, baits and literally dares a heavier broadsword wielder to pit his weight and might against it to smash through, thereby opening the broadsword wielder up to ripostes and strikes of opportunity that overzealousness deserves.
From seeing swords at museums I had the missconception that the "Bilbo sword" was the "standard spanish rapier" (ropera) and absolutely made up that the typical rapier was more of a "french standard" probably influenced by Mr Dumas and his musketeers 😂
A curved rapier would help cutting and hit odd thrust angles like a shamshir, yes?
im no expert but tl;dr curved points don't thrust as well as straight ones.
They follow through in the direction of the curve instead of straight-through, and break more easily.
Not sure it would be a rapier at that point. More like a dueling saber.
Wonderful video! Probably the only thing to add is the concept of weapon system…. With the rapier we have a dagger that is excellent at countering many of the issues mentioned…. For a long time shields were very important in war. Rapier isn’t always superior to polearms, even in a duel, so a lot of this is cultural…. Guns are often paired with swords, weight of the weapon system is always an issue
i recommend you to look for "Rodeleros" a spanish military unit that used rapiers (roperas) with a shield (rodelera)
For the practice of thrusting swords in mounted combat, honorable mention to the koncerz.
In spanish "ropera" translated to english means something like "Dressable" or "wearable", the reason of this name is that sword was not intended to be used for war but for civilian self defence use. This name was foneticaly adapted by french to the word " rapier" and taken by english too. The name "Bilbo" is the basqe name of the city that in castelain we name "Bilbao". this city has been famous during centuries for the high quality swords made there and exported to several countries in Europe and the whole world. Since every blade made in Bilbo had engraved the mark "Bilbo" on it, is a mistake to use this name to an unique type of sword, because there where a lot of diferent models of blades made in Bilbo that where exported to a different places and mounted in different types of guards. There's a RUclips channel from a serious expert in swords and knives called "Antiguo acero español" where you can find very good information about this theme and several more, the videos are in spanish but can use the "cc" button
The versatility of attack and defence options, together with its robustness, are clear winners for the broadsword in a battle. And if you do break/damage the point of a broadsword, you still hold a very capable weapon - not so the rapier.
Mat, please cover and compare Portuguese weapons and fighting style with Spanish ones!
Portugal had their own 18th Century Rapiers and Spain had a transitional Rapier design during that time.
Wait, when did a second pole ax arrive?
I saw in that video with Tod that 17th C. Spanish soldiers were issued rapiers. But it was known at the time that rapiers weren't ideal for melees. Why did they issue them to infantrymen?
Did it have something to do with pike warfare? That perhaps after getting through the push of pikes youd have a smaller handheld pike in your hand?
Well, I believe Matt’s point is that both classic rapier and bilbo sword were used in warfare of that period. I have some serious doubts that Spanish tercios were issued thrusting rapiers exclusively. It wouldn’t be their primary weapon, so any sort of mandatory uniformity on this is questionable.
Certainly not all Spanish infantrymen were issued rapiers (in the sense of long, thin, thrust-centric blades). There are many those "Bilbao" or "Bilbo" swords with shorter broad blades and cup or shell hilts in Spanish museums and armouries. They were often manufactured for armouries and for noblemen who were assembling their units and equipping their ships. I would say that those swords were common among soldiers while rapiers were less common.
But the Spanish sources usually do not call them "rapiers" and "broadswords". Just "swords". It's "espada de taza" or "espada de conchas", "cup-hilted sword" or "shell-hilted sword" and you need further description or to see the blade to know what it is. This means there is a lot of space for misinterpretation and for getting lost in translation, since it's easy to just translate "espada de taza" as "cup-hilted rapier" and the reader might assume it had long thin blade, while the original source is not indicating it directly. There might have been some Spanish commanders who really issued their units with rapiers and not broadswords - i don't want to dispute that totally - but I suggest to be very careful about interpreting what was written down.
There surely were many individual soldiers who decided to carry rapier on the battlefield. Besides the topic of how useful it might be on the battlefield, there is also the important topic of fashion, prestige and representation. (There were many Spanish lesser noblemen from often quite poor families - the hidalgos - for whom becoming professional soldier was an honourable way to earn living, not only in cavalry and among officers but also among the infantry. The rapier as "the gentleman's sword" might have been the choice because of those social reasons too.)
I think that in the "pike and shot warfare", in the Tercio, the choice of sidearm is not such an important issue. We may argue that broader cutting blade is more useful - and the prevalence of broadswords, messers, sabres, dusacken and other types of shorter and wider "hangers" among the European infantry of Thirty years war is suggesting that our idea is correct. (Many of those soldiers also weren't especially trained in the art of sword or rapier, they practiced with pikes and firearms, and short cutting blades are more intuitive to use.) But rapier, in the hands of somebody who was very well familiar and educated with it, surely wasn't completely useless.
I'm unable to answer the question "did they chose a rapier because they deemed it more powerful, or did they chose a rapier because they deemed it more cool" but I think this is the main question of this discussion.
@michaldudas7174 I appreciate the response, but Matt literally holds a long thin nearly thrust-only rapier and said they were manufactured for pikemen and musketeers.
And yes, I'm aware hangers were the go to sword for foot soldiers during pike and shot. In fact, it's one fo the few times in history where every combatant has a sword.
@@leofedorov1030 That's what I would have thought, but if you watch that video, Matt holds what appears to be a dueling weapon and points out how it was manufactured for pikemen and musketeers.
@@mattmiraglia3199 I think you are interpreting this too literally. It is largely believed that various styles were used both by infantry and by cavalry. There is no evidence that soldiers were pressured or let alone ordered to carry a sidearm with a very specific style of blade: single edged, double edged, no edge, specific blade length and width etc. There is no consensus btw that bilbo sword is not a rapier. The term rapier itself is rather ambiguous.
Matt, since you brought it up that people still want to call it a rapier, can you use the broadsword you have with a rapier fencing system? And by that I mean use it well enough against a rapier.