Would a Tudor Swordsman choose 'Sidesword' or Rapier?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 พ.ย. 2023
- This video is kindly sponsored by History Hit: With code SCHOLAGLADIATORIA1 (case sensitive), you will only pay £1 per month for the first 3 months. Link to sign-up: eu1.hubs.ly/H060-Zn0
▼3 extra EXCLUSIVE videos each month on PATREON, which make this channel possible:
/ scholagladiatoria
▼Facebook & Twitter updates, info, memes and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
▼Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
▼Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
▼Easton Antique Arms - antique swords for sale:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
#britishhistory #sword #rapier
This video is kindly sponsored by History Hit: With code SCHOLAGLADIATORIA1 (case sensitive), you will only pay £1 per month for the first 3 months. Link to sign-up: eu1.hubs.ly/H060-Zn0
Hi, Matt.
I know you ask for topics to cover, how about training? I'm a truck driver, have a few swords and have been trying to learn. The problem is due to my job and early starts, I couldn't possibly make any clubs as much as I'd love too. WhT if you did an online club? Or training vids ?
and developed hilts came abought bc people stopped carrying shields?
In my reading of Silver and Saviolo it seems the aristocracy adopted the "rapier" due to everything Italian being popular. Servants, and other regular folks, used a shorter weapon along with a buckler. Looks like the posh folks fought each other with their blinged out rapiers while their men would give an insolent commoner a drubbing with the sword and buckler. Also, in Silver's description of Saviolo, it is clear that Vincentio felt it was improper for he, a nobleman, to fight a commoner.
Saviolo, like his predecessor, Bonnetti was more of a “cultural attaché” or political spy for the Vatican. The fencing school would have been a great cover, allowing for plausible meetings with a wide variety of agents. Honestly I would not be surprised if George Silver was an agent for the Crown.
This also tracks with the timeline of the development of rapiers and parrying daggers. Written records indicate that formal and ritualized civilian, unarmored dueling began gaining a lot more traction at around the year 1500; material evidence corroborates this through an increase in the tendency towards long, thrust-centric swords, as well as the development of lateral hilt projections (ie, nagels and side-rings) on daggers starting at around the year 1500.
Note, this period also corresponds to a period of high urbanization; denser populations in less closely knit areas tends to mean greater personal risk of encountering armed conflict, and Spain was a rising empire (by definition, comprised of distinct groups liable to conflicting or competing interests). This same period was the beginnings of the transition from the military dominance of gentry and mercenaries towards centralized common soldiers (pike-and-shot)-which meant larger numbers of increasingly less armored laymen infantry.
Two Tudor related videos in one week? Dont mind that at all, 16th century is my favourite!
Not two anymore 😿
@@jamestipsfedora What do you mean, he posted one yesterday?
@@hrodvitnir6725 its privated
It's not such a modern difference. Swetnam's manual of 1617 makes a clear difference between use of the rapier and "backsword" also paired with the closed hilt dagger (bum dagger or ale house dagger) that according to period sources were the common self defense or going to the pub. He also makes note that the rapier is narrow enough to break on certain targets and recommends primarily thrusting while with the back sword he recommends more cutting (although still a thrust centric system). From my reading of it he is recommending the staff for walking around, rapier for horseback and dueling, and from other contemporary sources the ale house dagger for personal defense. The backsword in his manual seems to be more of an afterthought more dealing with prize fights hosted by the Masters of defense. Where as Silver makes the case for the closed hilt sword which also would have been common (although maybe not the fashion) in Tudor England and is probably a better comparison to the rapier for a Tudor gentleman making a choice of what to wear.
As I recall, Swetnam wrote in passing that the staff he recommended could be used on horseback as well as on foot. (This staff had a spike on the end, so it was basically a spear.)
@b.h.abbott-motley2427 yes he does say that towards the beginning of the manual. I'm not sure about the point on the staff, I know its talked about on the back of some of the staffs of the period but I don't remember reading that specifically.
@@markcarico546 Swetnam's whole staff system is based on thrusting exclusively & he mentioned how staves have "pikes" (spikes) repeatedly. For instance, he wrote, " I hold that a staff with a pike to have odds against any such long weapon, being equally matched in length."
Swetnam’s “spike”
(on the staff) was probably an iron ferrule rather than a special spearhead.
@@jaytomioka3137is he talking about something like the spike on the butt of earlier spears?
It's worth noting that a shorter blade is more useful in somewhat confined spaces. Narrow alleys, taverns, houses, that kind of thing. If you're fighting in such environments, there are scenarios where a dagger would be preferable, but also situations where you might benefit from the reach of a sword, while still preferring not to have too much reach and getting your weapon tangled against walls or ceilings.
You can't swing even an arming sword indoors for the most part, but you could thrust with a rapier. However, a shortsword or dagger is quicker to draw and the superior weapon once you get really close. For instance, if you face someone with a rifle, a rapier looks quite silly...
@@edi9892 Try drawing a rapier and an arming sword in a narrow hallway and tell me which one gives you the most trouble. I know from experience that the arming sword is often the better choice to have on your hip in such environments.
In the Tudor times swords became fashionable, great presentation! It's like...going shopping for a car today, shopping for a suitable sword. Yes please would love to know more
Great video. I'd love to know the specific types of swords you think each of those kinds of soldiers you mentioned at the end might have typically preferred as a sidearm based on their role. Thank you!
Great question, I'd also love to hear more about what makes the broader bladed swords be seen as more appropriate as military/'war' swords (and were there any reasons that precluded thinner, longer swords from being more prevalent in military applications).
@@Stoffoloff While a long blade is great in a one on one duel it is a liability if you suddenly find yourself with a close off axis threat. And in a melee that is exactly what can happen, you have no time for a fancy series of feints and disengages to set up a killing thrust instead it's all about brutally hacking through your opponents guard and putting them down as soon as possible so you can deal with the next opponent before they blindside you. Also if your normal role is fighting in close formation with a polearm you want a sword that won't tangle the legs of your fellow soldiers.
There had been weapons owned by wealthy people. This caused, they could buy expensiver weapons or many weapons for different purposes, and when a new Type of weapon became popular, they could buy it. But also poorer people could sometimes, but Not allways or everywhere, leagally own a sword. But being poor means, you Had to buy either a cheaper, or dated sword. Then there had been weapons owned by mercensries or other Professional or semiproffesional soldiers This men tried to somehow get good and modern weapons, in Tudor Periode Not allways paid by ruler or Gouvernement. I live in this Part of Germany, which was in HRE dqys the Most devided Part of Germany. Those small, and very small states had No real troops. They Had a small Police/ Bodyguard force, and in Case of war a militia was mobiized. In best Case this militia was a mix of policemen, ceremonial guards and targetshooers, in worst Case a levy of untrained and dated armed men. This means: In Case of war arround 1600, there had been lots of only semiofficial forces, who Had to use old and oldest swords, Being stored in the , weapons chamber' of a town or nobleman. When in 1618 Thirty Years War started in Germany, even Bidenhänder/ Zweihänder Had been taken Out of darkest parts of armoiries. In His novel , Simplicius Simplicissimus' ( a Bestseller in second half of 17th century HRE) writer Christoph von Grimmelshausen noted a robber, armed with a very large sword. So : So older swords Had been sometimes longer in use than expected.
Various 16th-century military manuals specified reasonably short cut-&-thrust swords for infantry. A few different manuals wrote that such swords have 36-37in blades (or blades no longer than 36-37in). Such writers worried about overly long swords being too difficult to draw swiftly.
Always an interesting question, later sources do seem to differentiate and sometimes there seem to be commonly upon agreed terms (at least in germany but i've seen them in english as well) that differentiate the swords sometimes. Especially if people need to be drafted for city defense or a military campaign. Interestingly Marcelli quotes Agrippa, Meyer and Marozzo in his Rapier treatise and seems to be quite indifferent to the differences of their swords. Another interesting point is that Marcelli talks about why none of the older Authors talked about the saber despite it being so important. He assumes that it is because often sabers and similar weapons were not allowed by the "princes" and the cities but the spada/sword was because it was the custom and right of citizen. This also explains why certain wepaon in treatises are not shown and why soldiers are often treated differently in treatises.
I feel like the long rapier is often more used with privileged people, officers even lower ranking ones as sign of nobility or status. But military sources do recommend short cutters since they dont get in the way in formations and funnily enough, are good for hacking fire wood. John Smyth iirc talks about long rapiers breaking in the melee press and therefore recommending shorter/broader swords. Sometimes it seems that famous persons also switched their rapiers out. Gustav Adolph often depicted with a longer rapier but in war with shorter ones.
Another thing is that pictural soures at least in the HRE seem to show poorer/common people, non citizens of a city carrying broader more allrounder blades or sometimes cutlasses(Kordelasch) or Hangers.
I'm really curious about the overlap in sword designs and use. Like when a new style of sword was coming in and people still used previous types, like the arming and side sword to rapier that is mentioned in the video.
What other transitional swords are there? How did they interact with their contemporaries? Fascinating subject.
And also: when do contemporaries start using different names for them (if they even did at all)?
I think all weapons are transitional in a way. just because a brand new sword design was invented doesn't mean everyone spent money to buy the latest design, some people used what they inherited from their parents, grandparents, etc. others couldn't afford new swords and bought older designs. It reminds me of guns; back when revolvers, breech loaders, and trapdoor rifles were brand new designs one would see some people continue to hunt or defend themselves with muzzleloaders they already owned because they couldn't afford new designs. Its a good topic though.
Yep, I know almost nothing about swords but I imagine that a gentleman with enough prosperity to commission a new sword would have a collection of old and new to use for different purposes. Much like the average firearm enthusiast today. Heck unless a guy was poor, guys like both of my grandfathers had a dozen or so different firearms for different purposes a hundred years ago and neither were wealthy by any means 👍🏼
@@dgoodman1484, not just a rich guy collecting new and old swords but poor people who could only buy old used swords or inherit their predecessor's swords. Years ago Scholagladiatoria made a video on medieval wages and how some soldiers could only use hand me downs or buy really used equipment.
I would say most weapons were part of an evolution. The rapier transitioned into the smallsword, the longsword got longer and kind of transitioned into the montante/zweihänder. And there is a whole "family tree" for how the polearms developed.
It’s amazing how much sword typology when translated from the native tongue is simply “sword” 😂 👍👍
Great video Matt I study renaissance fencing (purely due to that’s when the sources generally become understandable to me 😂) so this topic is hugely interesting to me 🙏
Haha yep Jian, Espada, well Katana/Ken similar...
It may also relate to the decline in use of shields as handguns and matchlocks made them increasingly less effective. That would be supported by the broad bladed sword remaining popular in Scotland where shields remained in use much longer that elsewhere in England and Europe.
Basically Rob Roy!
I wonder what happened with the Tudor armour video?
First!😁 I'm reminded of the swords depicted in the "Jacob Album" that shows several of the Elizabethan armors from the famous Greenwich works. They seem to have the blades typical of side-swords, or even rapiers, but have simple cruciform hilts like an arming sword, with no side rings or knuckle bows.
You don't need much hand protection if you're already wearing it.
Cant understate how much of it was to do with fashion either. A whole lot of the choice in type would be linked to such things as "oh he has an (insert type here), he must have money & be well traveled" . Such as having whatever was the latest faahion coming out of Rome & Paris for example.
Yes, though various English sources from the period & shortly after indicate there was at least the belief that longer swords & daggers had the advantage. That does seem to be one factor driving rapier length, which reached extremes.
Would you be interested in doing a video on the Alehouse dagger? It seems to be an under appreciated piece of Tudor (and later) English history.
Thank you for the information on the new history stuff as it were a partner have a Happy Thanksgiving and a merry Christmas in case I'll get to tell you next time. And God bless you
Good video thanks
must have been a nightmare to go sword shopping back in the day 😂😂
Probably about the same as pistol shopping now... HOW many glock clones and wonder 9's
Not unlike shopping for a phone today, it is a daunting task.
It must have been great!
Comparisons to pistol and phone aren't too far off I'd say, because COST is probably big factor in all of this.
"Man I'd really like a Glock because they're famous, but, I dunno, $1200...oh hey Bersa is said to be about as good, and it's only $350."
"I hear great things about the iPhone XV, but it's a month's rent, vs a last-gen Huawei they'll give me for free just for signing a year's contract...."
"That's an interesting sword there...Oh, it's called a rapier is it? Imported from Italy you say? Fancy! Shiny! ...Good grief my man, do you take me for a king? I like being fashionable as much as any gent, but that Sheffield-made one with the side ring will probably stab just as well."
I meant it must have been awkward since everything was just called 'sword'
Love to have a more in-depth discussion about the swords used during the 30 years War and the English Civil War. See this as the crossover point where firearms started to prevail over polearms and blades. Were there specific or more commonly used swords for cavalry as opposed those used by the infantry in this period? Context as always 😉
Yes please
Haven't watched this yes, will do so later,, you've done some good ones over the last few days.
Love 'sides words'.
I know this is a difficult question Matt BUT, if you had to pick just one sword from any era, what would it be?
My little heart leapt at 08:41 when you pulled out that swept-hilt with a shorter, broader blade, because I've a (repro) of one with a "Pappenheimer" style hilt. Nice to see that type actually existed! Definitely NOT for a civilian duel, but if I wanted to hack through a buffcoat, i'd much prefer it over a four-foot pointed bit of metal with limited cutting utility.
That said, as you pointed out, they're all swords. Not sabres, daggers etc, so the cut-thrust thing exists on a broad spectrum depending on envisaged usage. It's a bit like asking "when is a tachi a katana", or "when is a katana a Tachi". (Leaving aside the timeline, that depends on if you're carrying your sword for war or civilian use. At least, that's my take on it).
Good video; take home; It's a long, relatively narrow-bladed sword, just stick 'em with the pointy end.
Just a note, many, or even most, advantages of longer weapons can make they much more difficult indoors or on a ship, etc. I'd guess that most sailors would pick a full sized saber if they arebon land with plenty of space to fight. Put, more commonly the cutlass was the sword of choice for most sailors (or a hatchet or pins etc) because a rapier is too unweildy on a ship, etc.
In Japan, the Katana was primarily used only for outdoor engagements and wasn't the sword always by the user side, that was the wakizashi.
You are right, Prof. Lipscomb does present things quite beautifully 😉
Can i just say i actually really like history hit. It's genuinely good. There were several videos that i discovered (too late) that covered the same material i did for my masters disertation and it covered it very well. Would definititely reccomend it.
[Matt Easton talks about another kind of sword] "let's just grab one of those that happens to be within arms reach..."
It's not clear that rapiers with very long blades are advantageous for unarmored single combat. Rob Childs, one of the best HEMA rapier fencers alive today, recommends almost exactly the same blade length as George Silver did: half one's height plus three inches. That gives me a 38in blade, as does Silver's measure. Girard Thibault likewise rejected very long rapiers, though he gave a measure somewhat longer than Childs or Silver. I get about a 42in blade if the cross comes to my navel as Thibault wrote.
The carrying of swords in non-military situations probably had to do with the blurring of war and not war during the Wars of the Roses.
Would love to know more about shields of this period too
During the years of Henry VIII and Elizabeth, gentlemen would often risk combat at sea, defending themselves onboard ships. It was the way to get to the land war. It was not just large sea battles, it was also constant raids on the constant stream of transport to the other side of the water, both to and from war. Passengers were expected to defend themselves and the ship they were on, something that continued to be true till the end of the HEIC's trips to India. So the brief mention of traveling must consider high risk periods of travel by sea, during which some combat was often very possible if not even likely. The gentleman would face off at close quarters against cutlass, boarding axe, half pike, and against various levels of training among those opponents, some quite crazed and risk taking, as well as against other gentlemen also prepared for conditions of combat on a ship.
So if you were writing a historical novel set in the 16th century and your character called his sword an arming sword, that would not be anachronistic? Would it be common for someone to call it that?
I might just be weird, but I'd found that, while kind of stressful, fencing with an arming sword or backsword and buckler against a rapier isn't as overwhelming as people say, and at least one of the rapier fencers I've tried it with was a pretty successful tournament competitor. If you can defeat their first thrust, which I think most people can do most of the time, and then close in aggressively it's definitely a winnable fight for the person with the shorter sword.
Sidesword VS 1821 Light cav
What would you choose for a cavalry campaining in the Indian mutiny ?
Tell me Matt.... Why I did have a certain french Elve shooting into my mind when you did say "Fabris"? 🤣🤣🤣
Fab... if you read this - hope you and your family are well and greets to Kurso. 🙂
Would you rely on a cut-and-thrust sword over a point-centric sword for everyday carry, regardless of the context?
An unimportant sidenote from Germany, about the ,naming' of weapons in former centuries. When firearms appeared in nowadays Germany ,Büchse ' could be a large cannon , but also a handhold firearm, today that is a civilian rifle. In early flintlock era a ,Flinte' was a musket, today a shotgun. Gewehr is today a longbarreled gun ( shotgun, rifle, comined gun, for example a Drilling, also smaller wallguns, puntguns , Antimaterial rifles. But once Gewehr meant every type of weapon, for example a bayonnet is in german either a Bajonett or a Seitengewehr. So in the neighboring town of my Village IS a document of 18th century: From the citizens,who had the duty to guard the gates, two of three owned a Gewehr. Means this two of three owned a musket or rifle, or means this, only two of three owned a weapon of any Kind?
Its like fedoras and trilby hats- back in the day those were the exact same thing, simply the US and British names for it. But in the modern day the idiot and incorrect belief is that "trilbys" have a thin brim. In reality that was the style for both fedoras and trilbies back in the 1950s. They have never ever been terms for different hats.
I watch other things so sometimes I have to remember which Agrippa did what the swordsman or the philosopher.
I would posite that young men in period were no different than now, they got ahold of a sword they thought was cool because... whatever, and then learned to use it. Or they learned what father told them to...till they found one that they thought was cool and... People are people and still act generally the same a we always have, and boys with toys has always been a thing.
surely the answer is... which one goes with my codpiece? or my hat?
A fork is just a spoon with cutaways! 😆
Seriously though, how and what for is an objects used, defines it even more then how it looks or what it's genealogy is...
I am convinced that Matt has a twin. How does he have time to make all of the great videos. I just don't see how 1 person has the time or energy.😂
Yeah, in this video it's actually Tom Weston.
Question is that sword at the Wallace memorial for real it is so big hard to believe any one even godzilla would fight with some thing that big.
As I believe I said in a previous comment, I think the description we could consider is in the different style of fighting. With rapier it's a far more forward hand designation. It represents a more specific and targeted type of fighting. At least next to the previous more restrained, closer to the body movements of what I understand to be schools, fighting of the period.
Otherwise? The tail end of the vid?
You choose the sword you want to take for the situation at hand. If that's war? You want something else. If it's duelling, you want a particular set of traits. Right tool for the game.
And yes, have read plenty of times the book just says sword. It does get a bit annoying after a while.
It's a sword, it does sword things, so we call it a sword.
Have I shared the definition of a bastard sword I encounter on this channel?
Exact legal definition too here.
A sword, which is longer than a one handed sword and shorter than a two handed sword.
Case was a traveller claiming his three swords were stolen from him, as they couldn't be carried in city limits.
Kinda curious about something, I kinda wonder if your choice would reflect where you live. Like I remember reading it Canterbury tales that everyone outside of was armed that for example, in the German states, on the development of the messer sort of came as a way for the knife makers guild to cut into the profits of sword makers and I remember a Italian Renaissance that the Italian state basically urbanized very early compared to the rest of europes due to the are being hot bed of trade and invasions going as far back as the 1200s. Would there be as much as an urban v rural divide in sword choice like there are in fashion? I imagine fending off bandits would be different fending off a mugger or a dueler
theyd pick a pistol and second one. and then third one. Perhaps ask a squire two to pack a forth. ( they all were incredibly wealthy) Id suspect alongside sidesword or riding sword. Ive seen super ornate pistols from 1550s given to one of Mary's subjects and they had both enameled and married colors, white and red roses . a bit after H8s death in 1547. So around 1547-1550.
8:40 - What would you call this sword - swept hilt with shorter, broader blade? I like the styling and would definitely consider purchasing one (if made as an actual useable blade and not just for show). But it's hard to shop for one if you have no idea what to ask for, or even where to shop.
What happened to the video on Henry the VIII's armor? Was it taken down because of copyright?
I had to take it down for various reasons unfortunately.
@@scholagladiatoria too bad, I had it saved for later :/
Yeah, it sucks :-(
@@scholagladiatoria... was it the codpiece?
8:39 Are these wider swords stiffer when stabbing into resisting material?
I think thickness is more helpful for that than width.
I always thought the term 'developed hilt' was because, well, hilts developed. And like any evolution there is a blur between what was used, what was fashionable and what were kept as hand-me-downs. I've no doubt that favourite handles were married to new blades, or older blades gad new handle furniture added to them. We just love labels and taxonomy and neat little boxes now.
So my question on this episode is my under standing of english cities like London where it is quite narrow and crowded. Watching your fighting technique videos with similar swords how would long swords be best function in a crowded environment
+scholagladiatoria *Arming-sword or rapîer? Depends on the mission and the sword(s) a potential enemy would pack.* Arming-swords had backsword and/or broadsword blades, plus guards of increasing sophistication for hand protection. Rapîers were point-centric with straight blades of lozenge cross-section. In the Tudor-era Kingdom of Scotland, army officers used basket-hilt broadswords and targes with long centerline spikes, plus _Durgh_ and _Sgian_ as utility blades and/or for backup.
Where did the Henry the 8ths armor episode disappear to?!
Third strike!
What about the basket-hilted broadsword or backsword?
"at a certain point, ..." - pun intended , 😛
I enjoy watching Matt handle a sword with such familiarity and authority. I would pick up a sword and, after swinging it around and breaking something... 'k, now what?"
I was wondering about what sword do you think pikemen would use
So . . . it depends on context. Shocker. : )
I suppose there's an issue of predictability here. If a rapier is specialised for one-to-one duelling, you are reliant on people following the rules.
Imagine you get into a fight with someone at a bar. They will probably be with friends. You're probably all young (because people didn't live so long ) and therefore inclined to hot-headedness. You're all drunk. Will the friends stay out of it? Will they wait till you get outside and get your rapier out of its scabbard? Have you ever tried using your rapier after a bottle of wine?
I'm fascinated by the life of Caravaggio, one of my favourite painters who lived in the 16th century. He twice had to relocate after making his home city too hot for him to stay in what Wikipedia is described as "brawling". He killed at least a man who he had also apparently castrated. He beat another man with a club. It doesn't sound very "gentlemanly".
It might also relate to the katana-rapier comparison: if the Japanese don't feel compelled to follow the same rules, would you be better off with a different sword?
As soon as they stopped using shields they started to improve hand protection.
Does the cost of making one of these back have a big impact on what one is carrying?
Unrelated, had the Henry VIIIth armor's videos paused and wanted to resume after work and it's missing :( what happened to it?
Apparently Matt had to remove it.
@@dustincarner6675 Ah, darn
I appreciate the pricing given in pounds, so us Canadians don’t misunderstand the price, like when they just say ‘dollars’. 😆
The point is faster than the edge.
Curious what the thought process would also be for people who weren't really well practiced or skilled? For an individual purely interested in self-defense or protection use but not in practicing the martial arts of the sword in particular would a wider move effective cutting/slashing blade be easier to use as a functional weapon with less skill required than what we commonly call a Rapier?
Extrapolating from a modern context (which may not be wise, but is often the best we can do): I've instructed quite a few people in the rudiments of both and I'd say that using either effectively requires significant skill. One having no universal advantage of "easier to use" or indeed "ease of acquiring the skill to use well" over the other.
A complete and total novice might fair a bit better with a cutting sword as squaring up to a perceived threat and chopping seems to be the instinctual human response when it comes to real violence. That said it doesn't take much training to significantly improve on that extremely risky and largely ineffectual tactic. So anyone with a genuine interest in defense would immediately move beyond such considerations.
Assuming one was willing to acquire any skill at all, the choice would largely come down to what weapon was available to you/convenient to wear (both practically & socially) and what teacher or group you were able to practice with. As Matt points out, long thrusting swords have a notable advantage one-on-one while more balanced cut & thrust weapons are more useful for fending off multiple opponents. So there are meaningful differences between them in use, but those differences are unlikely to be decisive ones when it comes to choosing something for general self defense.
Where did you get the sidesword?
Kvetun Armoury
@@scholagladiatoria Thank you.
Okay, that's also interesting to know.
Did musketeers not use the longer blade in war?
I’d love to know the practical uses of the broader rapiers like LK Chen Rapier
length, width, and thickness are a balancing act dependent on what you want the sword to do.. if we assume a similar length in the blade a narrower, thicker blade will tend to be stiffer which is better for thrusting while a wder, thiner blade is better for cutting.
Think soldiers, militiamen, town guards. Fancy fencing and skilled point work are (a) not applicable for lack of time to train and/or (b) impossible in a melee. And you want a weapon practical as a sidearm yet also one that will not get in the way in a tight formation. And you want one that will not break easily, because, in battle, some of your opponents might wear cuirasses, buff coats, or even plate armor. Some might carry various types of shields, etc. But you still want to thrust a lot. You want reach. Ergo -- what is today called a "military rapier".
I'm having some difficulty properly forming my question, so please understand I am not a scholar nor practiced in swordsmanship in any meaningful way. Disclaimer aside, the question follows.
Supposing a hypothetical mid to late Tudor era man of low birth but through distinction of service or other means has found his station raised somewhat. Our hypothetical man will have skill in swordsmanship, a distinguished and ongoing military career, a (my assumption ) considerable social stigma or social stress and therefore more likely to be in need of proficiency in dueling skill and last but certainly not least have just enough worldly value to be a likely target of theft by violence and yet poor enough to not be as well shielded as those blessed with family wealth.
Assuming I haven't made a massive error so far with our hypothetical man.
My question that's been nagging at me is.
How would this man kit himself out, as a military kit isn't ideal for dueling, dueling kit would I assume be less than ideal for campaign, and daily life requires travel in which either of the previous kits are somewhat uncouth? Inappropriate maybe better?
How would you suppose this hypothetical man would split his time training? Which arms and armament, schools of swordsmanship, social circles and non campaigning livelyhoods would be most practical and maybe even open for such a person.
I'm making the assumptions that while even a high degree of military fencing skill would be of great use as compared to a novice that in a dual a fair to good duelist armed with a sword tailored to dueling would have a considerable advantage over even a master of military fencing armed with a proper campaigning sword.
Am I just completely wrong (I wouldn't be surprised if I am) or would this hypothetical man need to devote a considerable effort into learning multiple schools of swordsmanship?
Sorry for the very long winded question I know it could be refined by someone with a better understanding of the topic. I would greatly love to hear from some of you , even just how to properly pose this hypothetical.
why they never have triangular cross section blades like rondel daggers Khyber swords and dirks do since that will still make a robust thrust oriented design that will still cut once given an edge
I wonder how much fencing schools influenced sword design. For example if a particular master favored thrusting, his students bought more thrust centric swords? Of course, styles probably also flowed the other way too, if the elites were buying thrust centric swords then masters would want to teach those styles.
To what my understanding, sidesword tend to be more slender and lighter than earlier arming sword, but it terms of design they are very similar and the techniques of using them are basically interchangeable.
Can't fool me this time Matt! The answer is: context.
It seems to me like the correct answer to this question is “Yes.”
I just want a longer, lighter arming sword.
Very cutty at the tip
I"ve got a question I"d love to have unpacked a bit more. Are there many accounts of street duels from that period in which a "rapier" armed man fought a man armed with a basket hilted or broad bladed sword? and if so is there actually a statistically significant advantage for the "rapier" as in did they win 70% 80% of the time? or was it kind of irrelevant 50/50% ish and the more skilled swordsman won regardless. For example I would not be surprised if a military officer armed with his service weapon, aka battle oriented broadsword/sidesword could hack apart a rich dandy and his rapier pretty consistently.
We don't have enough data to say. There are some accounts of duels & fights with mismatched weapons, such as from coroner's rolls. We know that George Silver gave his "short sword," which had a blade as long as some HEMA rapiers used today, the odds over the rapier. Joseph Swetnam, by contrast, said a short sword was about as useful as a tobacco pipe against a rapier. (I don't recall the exact term Swetnam used, but he referenced Silver as a proponent of the sword over the rapier.) So people at the time disagreed, & got angry about it.
@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 thanks for the the reply, and lol I'm so not surprised that people were as arguing about it then also.
Has anyone thought about how height reach effects the equation? I'm fairly short so if I used a shorter sword than a taller opponent I'm putting myself in seriously hard spot. A tall guy however might be able to get equal reach with better cutting and stiffer pary
I'm very disappointed that he didn't say "context"
OMG even swords are part of a spectrum 😮
I wonder what Mr. George Silver thinks about this matter?🤔🤔🤔
Here,here
Were there periods with “nerdy” writers? Where general historians or writers just lumped everything together as swords but specialists (say, army acquisitions officers or fencing teachers) made more granular distinctions?
Context of combat
Styles are funny and they can go in and out of fashion. An arming sword blade from the 10th-12th centuries, provided it was in good condition, fitted into a basket hilt probably wouldn't raise a second glance at Killiecrankie.
Who's the maker of that sidesword?
Kvetun Armoury
If you want a longer blade for dueling, why most people used a 81cm blade in smallswords then in the 18th century? As we all know the only purpose for this weapon was dueling and status. I know they were shorter for the reason of carrying them easier around. But wouldn't you use a longer blade nontheless in a duel because your life is at stake?
What happened to Henry VIII's armour!
Sadly, I had to take it down for various reasons I won't go into.
now regarding your conclusion....
you say, people would choose the rapier before the sidesword because of the reach... Well I guess, most Spainards at least will disagree here 🙂
Let's start with the big question: were there left-handed basket-hilted / complex-hilted swords? If not then any sensible left-hander is going to choose the sidesword.
Yes there were, and some survive. Some of the treatises talk about advice for and against left handers.
@@scholagladiatoria Excellent! Perhaps a topic for another video or two?
I've always picked ambidextrous hilts for that very reason!
The first question you ask yourself is..."am I going for milk or am I fighting Ww3"? ---The Punisher . The right tool for the job.
And who have i pssed off recently...
Henry 7th reign wasn’t in the Tuder period?????
Definitely, but for the purposes of this video (because of the swords being discussed), I wanted to limit it to the 1500s.
Great video as always. It might have been easier to describe modern curator terms being poor to apply to historic terminology as "anachronistic". Come to think about it, I don't hear the term used much when it would so clearly fit grammatically. Is this fencing tribalism standing in the way of clarity?
Weren't Medieval arming swords and hand a half swords still common/predominant well into the sixteenth century at least till around 1550? It's always been my opinion that the late Medieval period lasted at least until around 1530 if not closer to 1550.
Mmmh, this variety of swords for different uses of course would also be dependent on what one could afford.
I don't necessarily disagree in principle, but at this time you could have bought any style of sword, to suit any pocket and quality. We can see from the records that relatively poor people did sometimes have rapiers, and some rich people did prefer a backsword - there may have been status tendencies, but they were certainly not universal.
@@scholagladiatoria Okay, that's additional information. Thanks.
❤
Why is a basket hilt sword also called a back sword? Were they worn behind you unlike a side sword?
They’re single edged so it has a spine or back where the back edge would be on a double edged sword
No, backsword refers to it being single edged. There are also double edged ones called basket hilted broadswords. In either case basket hilt will often be omitted and the sword will be called just a backsword or a broadsword, and conversely sometimes it will just be phrased basket hilted sword, in which case it can describe either.
And generally speaking, swords were never worn on the back in a way that they were intended to be drawn from there. But sometimes larger swords would be carried on the back for like, traveling/transport purposes.
That's a bit of a trick question, dont you think?
Maybe.... ;-)
weird realisation to have. This is probably what that chinese manhua was trying to get across when one of the characters said someone was using a sword technique with a blade as a criticism.