Search Results
7/15/2025, 9:54:09 PM
>>63985908
It really depends I guess. If you follow the analogy of the sword as a gun, the rapier was common from let's say 1550 to 1700, that is 150 years. Many different sources were written for many nationalities and purposes. 150 years ago from now is 1875. If you picked up a Mauser 1871 and got mad you couldn't do a Costa C-clamp, would you still call it a rifle?
All swords can do every kind of attack in theory. You can cut with a smallsword, you can thrust with a tulwar. What matters is effectiveness. Outside of the blade shape/length itself, the way you hold it/the grip is most important IMO. More forward weighted blades obviously cut better but so does a more hammer or handshake grip. Centering the weight with 2 fingers around the ricasso on a rapier like the spanish make it almost effortless to thrust if it has a good distal taper. (talking like 15mm down to 2-3mm)
What do you define as a rapier and what do you define as a rapier source? You can do everything you read in a Giganti or Capoferro manual with a late 18th century Neapolitan spanish style transitional rapier/side sword, you can even cut better. But you won't have the same length. There are no firm categories where 1 weapon literally excludes you from using it a certain way, the only thing that matters is how good it is at doing that specific thing.
Also military sabre sources are rarely, RARELY so focused on only swords with curved blades that they almost all work for straight blades. You may have to adjust your timings. But even sabre blades themselves largely straighten by the end of the 19th century without any fundamental change in sources.
>Picrel is a Neapolitan gardes du corps sword from the 3rd quarter 18th century I got for 700 ish from Czernys and is one of the nicest fucking things I have ever handled. I call it my 'dueling' sword only because I have a massive fuck off pre-1882 French cavalry pallasch I have already claimed as my 'war sabre.'
It really depends I guess. If you follow the analogy of the sword as a gun, the rapier was common from let's say 1550 to 1700, that is 150 years. Many different sources were written for many nationalities and purposes. 150 years ago from now is 1875. If you picked up a Mauser 1871 and got mad you couldn't do a Costa C-clamp, would you still call it a rifle?
All swords can do every kind of attack in theory. You can cut with a smallsword, you can thrust with a tulwar. What matters is effectiveness. Outside of the blade shape/length itself, the way you hold it/the grip is most important IMO. More forward weighted blades obviously cut better but so does a more hammer or handshake grip. Centering the weight with 2 fingers around the ricasso on a rapier like the spanish make it almost effortless to thrust if it has a good distal taper. (talking like 15mm down to 2-3mm)
What do you define as a rapier and what do you define as a rapier source? You can do everything you read in a Giganti or Capoferro manual with a late 18th century Neapolitan spanish style transitional rapier/side sword, you can even cut better. But you won't have the same length. There are no firm categories where 1 weapon literally excludes you from using it a certain way, the only thing that matters is how good it is at doing that specific thing.
Also military sabre sources are rarely, RARELY so focused on only swords with curved blades that they almost all work for straight blades. You may have to adjust your timings. But even sabre blades themselves largely straighten by the end of the 19th century without any fundamental change in sources.
>Picrel is a Neapolitan gardes du corps sword from the 3rd quarter 18th century I got for 700 ish from Czernys and is one of the nicest fucking things I have ever handled. I call it my 'dueling' sword only because I have a massive fuck off pre-1882 French cavalry pallasch I have already claimed as my 'war sabre.'
Page 1