Rapier

I stumbled upon this intresting article about the rapier sword that chanced pretty much my image of this sword:

http://swordforum.com/articles/ams/char-rapier.php

It seems that the Hollywood movies have given out very wrong image of this weapon.The article states that it was not light and very fast sword like i always before have imagined.
Here is a piece of the article for those are not willing to read the whole of it:

Rapiers Were Heavy & Slow

Contrary to popular belief, from a modern perspective, rapiers were rather long, heavy (2) and slow swords; In fact, rapiers were as heavy as most single handed swords of the day, and heavier than modern cavalry sabres. In contrast, later small-swords had a weight about one third of that of a rapier.

That the opposite perception prevails is attributable mostly to the 19 century novelists who projected onto the renaissance the vastly faster sword play of their own age; This trend was further accentuated by the motion picture industry which has and continues to present rapiers as capable of all the adroit blade to blade actions of the modern sport fencing weapons (4).

The reason behind the rapier's heft were numerous, but probably the main one was that it was initially opposed by heavy weapons and thus blades had to be sufficiently robust to withstand their onslaught. In any event, it was this weight, plus the long blade, that imparted to the rapier a slowness of point that restricted it to fencing in single time.

Whilst the rapier may have been an acceptable dueling weapon, George Silver's (5) objections notwithstanding, its long blade must have placed it at a disadvantage in self defense situations; It was slow to draw and difficult to maneuver in crowded or tight settings. Nevertheless it offered sufficient advantages, over the alternatives, to make it the weapon of choice for over a century and a half.

Funny, isn't it. I remember reading an article where an old master (long dead) said that a "master of Defence," i.e. a skilled fencer, should be able to defend himself from any weapon. Therefore the Rapier needed to be robust. I'm a little concerned about this particular article though as he uses the term "broad sword" which refers to an 18th century Scotish weapon.

Linky. Have fun reading more about rapiers, longswords and whatnot than you'll ever need to know. :book:

That said, the rapier was a civilian weapon - in the context of urban street fights, "any weapon" is a rather smaller category than on a 1500s battlefield crawling with cut-and-thrust swords, longswords, two-handers, pikes, lances, maces, warhammers, and more different kinds of polearms with strange names than you knew ever existed. Not that anyone in their right senses took a rapier to a war anyway.

Exactly, you want something either longer and two handed or shorter and faster and you make sure it flippin will take his head off.

More because a rapier isn't the best thing around against armour, or the most robust blade for the usually rather rough treatment swords tend to get on the battlefield. Mind you, many of the military cut-and-thrust blades of the time look like only slightly thicker and wider rapiers...