Rapiers on the Battlefield

[Kongamato]

Was the rapier ever used in combat outside of a gentlemanly duel? I would like to know if it had a place on the battlefield during the time it reigned supreme as the sword of choice in Europe. If so, what purpose did it serve? Was it used as a backup weapon, or did it have a primary role? I hope you can answer some of my questions.

[Hakonarson]

It was a sword, and if used would ahve been used like any otehr sword - as a secondary weapon.

It wouldnt' be much use on het battlefield as it has next to no armour penetrating ability.

Rather more solid weapons were evolved such as the Estock, and eventually the cavalry sabre.

[troymclure]

my understanding was that the rapier was popular around a time when heavy armour (plate mail) fell out of fashion due to the popularity of those stick like objects that had gunpowder in them... therefore rapier's were a secondary weapon to guns and were designed they way they were becuase they didn't need much armour piercing capability.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (troymclure @ Mar. 26 2003,23:56)]my understanding was that the rapier was popular around a time when heavy armour (plate mail) fell out of fashion due to the popularity of those stick like objects that had gunpowder in them... therefore rapier's were a secondary weapon to guns and were designed they way they were becuase they didn't need much armour piercing capability.

The disadvantage of a rapier is that it rather lacks stopping power and is only really effective in one form of attack--the thrust. In that mode of attack, it could inflict puncture wounds that would be almost certainly mortal (thanks primarily to the medical care of the day), but it couldn't cripple someone at one blow. A guy could have a rapier sticking out of his chest, but he could still fight if he was sufficiently determined.

Which is why the most popular sidearm in the post-gunpowder era was the sabre or cutlass, or other short, heavy blade. If a chop from one of these weapons struck the torso, it would lay it open. If it struck a limb, it was crippled. If it struck the head or neck--well, you can guess.

[econ21]

I seem to recall people saying rapiers in historical combat were rather different from the very thin ones used for sport today. I can imagine a heavier thrusting sword being very effective in combat when used by a skilled fighter - perhaps especially one with a rather shorter blade.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (Simon Appleton @ Mar. 28 2003,04:00)]I seem to recall people saying rapiers in historical combat were rather different from the very thin ones used for sport today. I can imagine a heavier thrusting sword being very effective in combat when used by a skilled fighter - perhaps especially one with a rather shorter blade.

Well, I was thinking of a 'classical' rapier, myself. I can see a heavier one being more useful.

[A.Saturnus]

I`m reading some books about weapons and tactics in the post-medieval period right now. They focus on German armies, but French, Russian and Spanish are also mentioned. The rapier was described as a battlefield weapon of this time, however, no regular army seems to have been equipped with it. Infantry had most of the time a sword with a rather thin blade (the "Degen" in German) but it was made for thrusting and slashing, so not a rapier. Cavalry had a heavier version of this, the Pallasch. Later, under influence of the Turkish wars, scimiters became very common.

[Tachikaze]

Rapiers were actually capable of slashing attacks. They would not necessarily kill the opponent, but injure them enough to incapacitate the opponent and give an opportunity to drive home a fatal thrust.

One of the reasons rapiers evolved was because of heavy armor. Armor was becoming so heavy, it could ward off powerful swords, which were becoming increasingly unwieldy. Rapiers were thin and agile enough to find openings in armor.

Rapiers are very fast. If I had a choice between a rapier and katana, I would opt for the rapier.

[Stormer]

whats a rapier?

[Kongamato]

A Rapier is a long, thin, one-handed sword. Fencing simulates fighting with one. Rapier duels have been romanticized over history, in the works of Shakespeare and other famous writers.

I agree with Tachi that if I were to fight a Katana-wielding opponent, I would choose a Rapier. The only observable danger in a fight like this would be if the Katana cuts the Rapier in half, which would require a lot of skill.

[Stormer]

hmm well like a no danchi sword if omeone ran at me with one of those nasty things i jump into my apache helicopter and gun them down with a coule or rockets to rip the body apart of corse

[BlackWatch McKenna]

I would chose the Katana.

You can parry and lop a guys hand off with a Katana. You would only have to defend against a thrust....

[DemonArchangel]

depends, i would use the katana only if i needed to dismember the body afterwards, a rapier beats katana easily.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (DemonArchangel @ Mar. 31 2003,17:59)]depends, i would use the katana only if i needed to dismember the body afterwards, a rapier beats katana easily.

Yes, in single combat a rapier is pretty much the best bladed weapon available, because it's so very light. If you can avoid being struck, you can cut your opponent to bits. But in pitched battle, I doubt it's effectiveness.

[Div Hunter]

I would go the Katana with Titanium or DU chainmail Then again it's all about the relative skill of the oponents, know your enemy

[A.Saturnus]

rapier vs. katana? Remembers me of the film Rob Roy, there it was Florette vs. Claymore, guess who won...
I doubt you could defend with a rapier against a katana so you had to kill the enemy with first strike and that`s difficult with a rapier.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (A.Saturnus @ April 01 2003,08:45)]rapier vs. katana? Remembers me of the film Rob Roy, there it was Florette vs. Claymore, guess who won...
I doubt you could defend with a rapier against a katana so you had to kill the enemy with first strike and that`s difficult with a rapier.

It depends on the rapier. If its a thicker, sturdier one then it could work. A later, smaller one would be too light.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (Div Hunter @ Mar. 31 2003,23:43)]I would go the Katana with Titanium or DU chainmail

Good luck standing up.

[Brutal DLX]

A finely crafted Katana will, as someone mentioned here before, cut the rapier in half if the wielder would be skilled enough to make contact, which is what I assume.
(It's of not much use to debate the outcome of a duel with said weapons between two absolute beginners.)
The rapier guy would have to be extremely lucky and if he could indeed wound the Katana wielder, then this would be his last action as he would instantly lose his sword arm in retaliation.
The proper weapon to defend against a Katana is a jitte, which is used to trap the blade and twist it out of the hands of its wielder or even break it, if enough skill and force is applied.

[DemonArchangel]

errm, brutal, if i was the rapier wielder, i'll be sure to KILL you on the first thrust.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (Brutal DLX @ April 03 2003,03:36)]The proper weapon to defend against a Katana is a jitte, which is used to trap the blade and twist it out of the hands of its wielder or even break it, if enough skill and force is applied.

A rapier isn't designed for force on force, and that wasn't how a skilled user wielded it. If someone came at you with a chop, you didn't use it in an overhead guard position as if it were a claymore. Rather, it is for parrying attacks, and then quickly whipping back for a powerful lunge or a less deadly but nonetheless debilitating slash. It's sort of like fighting for center with some martial arts--the quickness of the rapier allows a skilled user to control his opponents attacks, rather than block them. It is then that he puts the tip of his blade someplace painful.

Now, with a more practical (heavier ) battlefield rapier as I've been reviewing in a book of medieval weapons, a Katana would have a hard time cutting through it; it would be difficult even if the rapier-user made the unwise decision of throwing up a rigid block.

[Brutal DLX]

I know exactly how a rapier is used, but I also know how a Katana is used. Indeed if the rapier guy manages to thrust into his opponent's heart, the Katana wielder will die, but he will take the rapier guy with him. You underestimate a skilled Katana fighter immensely.
He is at least as quick as the rapier wielder, so the outcome isn't certain at all. If the rapier guy misses his thrust, he WILL get hit. If he is guarding, he will have a very hard time parrying a fast cut from a katana, his only chance would be to step away and not let the weapons meet and then counterattack.
However, I agree that the rapier wielder has an edge over someone using a western sword, be it a bihander, longsword or anything in between.

[A.Saturnus]

Quote[/b] ]
errm, brutal, if i was the rapier wielder, i'll be sure to KILL you on the first thrust.

That`s the difficult part about it. With the rapier you have to hit the opponent at a vital point - the heart or the head - to disable him, whereas the hit of a heavier weapon as disabling almost anywhere. And I seriously doubt you could parry with a rapier against any sort of heavier weapon.

[Tachikaze]

According to conteporary engravings, rapier thrusts were most often through the head (yuk). Duels were very quick and anticlimatic. Usually the winning blow came in the first attack. It was usually not fatal (I guess even the head shots).

However, dueling rapiers differed from battlefield rapiers. They were made for quick thrusts on unarmored opponents. A samurai would have no chance, unless he were Toshiro Mifune or Shintaro Katsu. A battlefield rapier (specified in the topic of this thread) was a heavier weapon. The tip was very sharp, but widened considerably to the hilt. This kept a fine balance, but provided some power. This sword was the result of thousands of years of sword design; it was very effective, especially as armor was becoming less common.

I have practiced fencing. But, I'm pretty much a coward against real swords. The dueling rapier would make a one-on-one fight pretty easy vs. a samurai (skill levels being equal). A battlefield rapier was not as quick, but also had the advantage of effective length over a katana. For a coward like me, I want first attack, as far away from my opponent as possible. If it fails, I will show the samurai that a man can run with a rapier faster than he can run with a katana.

Am I biased? Look at my pseudonym.

PS: please don't confuse a rapier with a foil (or competition epee or sabre). A foil is a piece of sports equipment. A lot of people confuse them (probably due to movies).

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (A.Saturnus @ April 04 2003,07:09)]That`s the difficult part about it. With the rapier you have to hit the opponent at a vital point - the heart or the head - to disable him, whereas the hit of a heavier weapon as disabling almost anywhere. And I seriously doubt you could parry with a rapier against any sort of heavier weapon.

A stab in the sword arm, neck, or head would certainly be the end of the fight.

And one can parry with a rapier against a weapon of any weight... provided that you get out of the way first

[A.Saturnus]

Pablo Sanchez, I fear we have to test it. I see you tomorrow at sunrise

[Pablo Sanchez]

Quote[/b] (A.Saturnus @ April 05 2003,08:02)]Pablo Sanchez, I fear we have to test it. I see you tomorrow at sunrise

*sweats excessively*

Well, uh, I tend to sleep in on Sundays, and my grandma is in town so I have to visit her, so it would be very nice to reschedule. Maybe sometime next week?


And--hey, look out behind you

*runs away*

[DemonArchangel]

I'll duel with you A. Saturnus, but an advance warning, i'm dishonorable.

[Brutal DLX]

I'm not confusing the rapier with the sports equipment, Tachikaze. You may have practiced fencing, but we're talking about a fight between two masters.
We seem to agree on the first hit being decisive, but I strongly disagree that the rapier guy would have an easy time scoring that hit. And if he misses, he won't be able to evade a Kensai.
Anyway, reminds me of that post from Solypsist linking to one forum where they debated whether a light sabre could deflect a phaser beam. lol. So that's going to be my last post in this thread before it get more absurd..

[A.Saturnus]

Quote[/b] ]
And--hey, look out behind you

...
...
...
hmmm...
...
...
...
...
...
What is there behind me... ?? Don`t see anything...

Anyway. Brutal DLX, don`t think that`s comparable. The inaneness of that light saber debat was that they argued about what would happen if two fictional weapons would be used against each other, while this is a serious question of military history. Our lives could depend on it