A question regarding Rapiers..

[Casper Bradak]

Yeah, likely. If not fond of them, at least he says they're an option if you must do something other than thrust.

"Againe, and againe I say, strike not one blow in a fight, at what weapon soever thou fightest withall, except it be a wrist blow, and that you may aswell doe with a rapier, as with a sword, for a wrist blow consumeth but alittle time, yet better use no blow at all, but continually, thrust after thrust…"

[Steven Engelbach]

Oh absolutely it is the text (trying to figure out this treatise from just the pictures is fruitless):

"Ma la ferita di mandiritto per testa, che qui oltre si vede, contra una terza puo' esser venuta perche uno sia andato a' trovare la spada all'altro"

roughly:

"But the attack [or wound] of Mandiritto to the head, that here further one sees, against a Terza can have happened because one has gone to find the sword of the other,..."

Note, the text at the bottom of the image is for the next image (if you look at the end of the text there is number that refers to the plate to which it is associated).

A Mandiritto (or mandritto) is absolutely a cut--Fabris explains all of the cuts on the unnumbered plate before Plate #1 (the page immediately before). Again, the text is on the page before with the section titled:

"Discorso sopra la figura che dismostra la natura dei tagli, dove vano a ferire."

Somewhat Literally and Roughly:

"Discourse over the figure that demonstrates the nature of the cuts, and where they go to wound."

And the Alfieri examples are just as conclusive:

From Book 2, Plate 13
"...o' vero per C, di mandritto coll'abbassare la mano, e ferire alla gamba destra."

Where 'C' is a line on the plate bisecting the leg of the victim below the knee:

"...or as C, in mandritto with the lowering of the hand, and attacking [or wounding] to the right leg."

However, as Dr. Anglo says, most of the attacks are thrusts. Fabris details many more thrusts than cuts, and while Alfieri details quite a few cuts, there are far fewer cuts than thrusts, and always shown as a secondary or tertiary tactical options.

Steve

[John_Clements]

Hi Stu M.

Since you mentioned most rapiers as supposedly distally flattening toward their tips in regard to their cutting capacity, it reads as if you were offering this as evidence they cut?Anyway, I go on the evidence I can experience from my own cutting tests and my own examination of real weapons, and then seek a more holistic understanding of a historical manual, rather than isolating one instruction from one text and running with it to the exclusion of all others (as we see occur from time to time).

I think the implication in Swetnam’s statement on wrist blows with his rapier is self-explanatory when he advised: “strike not one blow in a fight, at what weapon soever thou fightest withall, except it be a wrist blow, and that you may as well doe with a rapier, as with a sword”. (p. 35) Since more directly he instructed: “Also, take headeth that thou strike not with thy rapier, for so thou may breake it, and bring thy self to thine enemies mercy, and it may be he will take the advantage of thee”. (p. E3). This hardly sounds like a weapon whose blows are going to significantly bite into flesh (especially if delivered with a mere "wrist blow"). As well, seeing that in Part XII, he writes of “to give a wrist blowe, the which blow a man may strike with his Rapier, because it is of small force, and consumes little time…” would again logically seem to fit in with the understanding that this kind of hit on the human wrist (with its thin bones and bundle nerve endings) can resulting disarming a man regardless of the nature of the weapon used.

A “cut” after all is any blow with the edge of a sword, regardless of the actual sharpness of such an edge or the capacity for that sword to make an incise wound. Just as a particularly curved sword can still thrust, though not nearly as well as a straight one, even a slender sword can “cut”, but not nearly as well as a wider one. After all, even a car-antenna or a slender cane rod can “cut” if you slash someone with enough force and hit the right spot.

Rapiers come in all shapes and sizes, and classifying them all as “rapiers” is not always easy (and as I described in my 1997 book, they are quite typical misidentified). But what they all have in common is that they are decidedly slender and rigid blades designed for a thrusting style (as opposed to a “cutting and thrusting”) of swordplay.

JC

[John_Clements]

Steve, you hunches are right, I think. If you think of edge blows with a light, slender, rigid blade not in terms of being shearing blows intended to incapacitate, but rather as distracting and harassing actions designed to open the opponent up to a more lethal thrust, then it all makes sense. These cuts will break skin, they will hurt, but they won’t stop a man intent on killing you.

On a level of personal anecdotal evidence: when we’ve tried to include rapier cuts while sparring intensely it was impossible. Strange thing is, with blunted tips and masks and padded jackets we could certainly make safe thrusts that we believed would have resulted in kills…but we couldn’t safely make slashing blows with the edges of these blades because it hurt too much (!). We ended up with really long nasty bruises and painful raised welts that, while extremely irritating (enough to make us stop fencing for a few moments) would surely not have prevented an earnest man fighting for his life from continuing with an attack. It was certainly interesting. But, when we consider it in light of the results of test cuttings on raw meat with sharp rapiers and the kind of wounds described in historical accounts of rapier fights, and the techniques the rapier masters advise, it makes sense.

JC

[TimSheetz]

Hi John,

I have always figured the prime target for these sort of wrist cuts to be the fingers/hand and the face, as these could produce the most effects on the targets - temproary inability to fight at maximum ability due to distraction - pain, and in the case of fingers maybe even damage....

My support for this opinion is that rapier hilts most often were designed to stop that very thing from happening, therefore it must have been somewhat effective.

Striking the face I could only see doing if I had acually moved too close for effective thrusts and maybe could plant a 'nose-breaker' or a slash on the eyes/brow area on my target.

Of course, I'd rather spit them on the tip.

Tim

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi John,

I don't think we are actually disagreeing at all. Rapiers must be able to cut or Swetnam and others would actually recommend specifically not to do so. As it is Swetnam greatly favours the thrust (as one would expect of a rapier master) yet says that a wrist blow is an option.

You say that the weapon isn't going to significantly bite into flesh. I agree, it likely won't. There is no way though that I would want ot be hit with the edge of a rapier anywhere in shirtsleeves or bare skin.
Now that this discussion has progressed I guess we aren't really debating anything anymore.
Cheers,
Stu

[John_Clements]

Hi Tim, long time no hear. Yes, I think along with the face/head, the wrist/forearm and even the knee are the key targets for this kind of strike. The masters Fabris in 1606 and Capo Ferro in 1610 (who clearly was using a slender rigid rapier) advised making them with a sawing motion of the blade’s length, if I recall correctly. This is not because you literally "saw back and forth" but that you make a pulling slice with the impacting motion. This is necessary not because the edge is of the weapon razor sharp at all, but because the edge impact itself (unlike with a wider cutting sword) is insufficient on its own. Hence, a pressing pulling action helps insure a laceration-–even if just a shallow one. Again, this is certainly consistent with our experiments on raw meat (just as the “tearing” scrapes we discovered with tip cuts are consistent with those in period literature).

JC

[John_Clements]

Hi Stu M.
Yes. That makes sense. I'm sure we all would agree it comes down to definition of "cut", which unlike the term "thrust" there are certainly different degrees of “cut” ---though they are all edge blows.

The problems, I think, comes about when people try the things they see in the movies with rapiers, cutting through ropes and belts and clothing, etc. Or else they rapier fence with super light, thin, epees and foils and try to chop and hack like it's a wider arming sword. Or worse, they fence very sloppy with rapiers and when recovering back from missing a thrust, in the process brush the blade against their opponent and then yell, "I cut you! You're disabled!" To justify all this they quote and misquote the source texts, ignore historical and physical evidence, and misrepresent the actual handling and performance characteristics of the real weapons. On top of this, as I wrote earlier, there are all sorts of historical blade configurations now labeled “rapiers.” The solution, as we see it, is educating enthusiasts as to the actual effects of applying the actual techniques using real weapons. It’s a process that will take time, as we are all still exploring.

JC

[Shawn Cathcart]

Look at the plate referenced though, he's not cutting with the edge of the sword in that plate from Fabris, its very clearly a tip cut. There is a technique that is quite useful that makes slashes at the face very useful.

At times while binding during Rapier its quite possible to take your point offline slightly. Many times by winding properly and a snap of the wrist you can snap the point back on line. This will usually snap into the face. The thing to remember is that it just skitters off a fencing mask unless you apply pressure directly after. If there is no mask, this snapping motion with the tip would very easily bite into the flesh of the face, therefore lodging the point, allowing you to thrust harder into the face. The Fabris plate shown to me indicates this technique. I've both used it, and had it used against me (thanks to Milan <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> ). I'm being given the long point, I try to slide the point off-line while closing, he voids and with a wrist forearm action snaps the point into my face. This would be the cutting motion. My own momentum would push the tip through my face, this being the thrusting motion. This is a very fast technique. It does not require a full arm cutting motion. Anyone doing such with a Rapier would quite quickly regret it in my experience, its simply too large of an opening.

To me the strikes at the wrist are purely blunt trauma. Press the inside of your wrist, its quite a tender spot isn't it. I think their taking advantage of this. Someone misses with a thrust as you void, you quickly snap your blade across that tender part of the wrist causing a blunt blow that would possible make someone drop their Rapier at best, and at least would cause them to flinch long enough to snap the tip up after into the chest of face with a thrust.

From the sparring I've done and the many blades I've seen at the Glenbow I'm pretty certain Rapier "cuts" were just harrassing techniques, rather than disabling ones.

[Stuart McDermid]

Sean makes some good points.

At times while binding during Rapier its quite possible to take your point offline slightly.

Not just posible, but in some texts, desirable Pallas Armata and Wyld (transitional rapier at best) to name two. P.A in stringering to widespace defences and Wyld in parrying by moving the point and keeping the hilt in place whilst parrying.

The thing to remember is that it just skitters off a fencing mask unless you apply pressure directly after. If there is no mask, this snapping motion with the tip would very easily bite into the flesh of the face, therefore lodging the point, allowing you to thrust harder into the face.

I had not considered this.
Perhaps the Martinez' idea to use oversize point d'arrets on their rapiers is a good one. You certainly know when your point has stuck with these on. I've seen one on an epee and fencing with it was alot of fun as the point would stick satisfyingly into the target rather than bouncing off.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Steven Engelbach]

I'm not sure it's showing a tip cut (or at least that it was meant to show a tip-cut) because Fabris' description of how to cut is contrary to tip-cuts. He specifies a draw cut that hits on the third part of the blade and is drawn through the fourth part (Fabris divided the rapier blade into four parts, the first being the part nearest the hilt, etc).

As to how he recommended the actual cutting motion to be done: He described four types of cuts:
1. From the wrist only
2. Wrist and elbow
3. Shoulder wrist and elbow
4. Shoulder only (keeping the wrist and elbow stiff).

He says to only use #1 and #4, as #2 & #3 (he says) leave the user too open to counterattack.

I would think (but this is only speculation on my part, only supported by my intuition) that the wrist/forearm cut would have the best chance out of any cut, of ending a rapier fight. There isn't that much "meat" on the forearm, so cutting down to the bone would be much more likely than on the leg. While no one will die from any wound there (except from infection), it might make holding or directing the weapon difficult or impossible. However, not every cut would do that (probably, it would take a lucky cut), and I'd rather push the tip through my opponent's face (which will almost certainly end the fight right away). But in a situation where he was cutting at my leg, a good stop-cut to the forearm might while voiding the leg might not be a bad tactic (Capoferro and Alfieri both show this technique). However, given the cutting capability (or lack thereof) of the rapier, any armor on the forearm (a little stiff leather worn under the sleeve) is going to protect against this.

Steve

[Shawn Cathcart]

Not just posible, but in some texts, desirable Pallas Armata and Wyld (transitional rapier at best) to name two. P.A in stringering to widespace defences and Wyld in parrying by moving the point and keeping the hilt in place whilst parrying.

The beat action here works quite well and is usually followed up by then snapping the point back on line while the hand holds the beat blade off line. Or by keeping contact on the blade and then winding the hilt to then push the blade aside and bring the tip back online.

I had not considered this.
Perhaps the Martinez' idea to use oversize point d'arrets on their rapiers is a good one. You certainly know when your point has stuck with these on. I've seen one on an epee and fencing with it was alot of fun as the point would stick satisfyingly into the target rather than bouncing off.

Well I'm not sure how large the point d'arrete's are that the Martinez' use but ours are a fairly decent size. One point is for injury. A smaller surface area at the tip digs in more and hurts like a bugger <img src="/forum/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" />. The problem with making them too large though is that if your using Rapiers with swept hilts (which I don't like, I much prefer a cup hilt or shell) the tips can easily get caught up or jammed in the cage of swept hilt rapiers, something that wouldn't happen really if there was no thick end on the Rapier. But its a minor issue to be sure.

[John_Clements]

Hi Shawn,
There are of course those specialty rapiers with "spatulate" points designed to facilitate this very technique (there's a fine example at the Walalce Collection in London and drawings of them in my 1997 book). The fact that they had to flatten and widen the last 6th or so of the blade at the point in order to cut like this says something I think about the technique and the nature of edge blows with a slender blade.

JC

[Webmaster]

However, given the cutting capability (or lack thereof) of the rapier, any armor on the forearm (a little stiff leather worn under the sleeve) is going to protect against this.

I think you've hit on one of the problems with rapier "cutting" here. While nothing is really going to protect your knuckles from getting smashed short of metal gauntlets (and that nice cage hilt), most of Europe was still wearing long sleeves made of thick material while carrying around their rapiers. We frequently mention on here how heavy wool doublets provide a surprising amount of protection from even longsword cuts. Given that, being whipped on the arm or leg by a rapier might barely even be noticed through thick sleeves from anything less than a solid elbow cut, which of course opens you up to the thrust. I think "whipping" is probably a better word than "cutting" when applied to rapiers, but since they both involve the same motion I don't think the masters bothered to make the distinction. Either way, I don't believe it's a technique that's going to work in any situation, whereas a thrust is pretty much guaranteed to penetrate and cause pain every time.

[Steven Engelbach]

Well, I wouldn't say a cut would never work, I think it's one of those things that you'd have to judge before you use it (depending on what you expect from it). Or, if you have the luxury of preparing for a duel with someone who is know to use cuts, equip approprately. There are so many variables here that it's really hard to say what would work and what wouldn't. For example even within the same period, what constitutes a "rapier" is quite variable. One individual might prefer a light-bladed weapon, with a blade of around 42 inches. He has knowing sacrificed pretty much every possibility of cutting effectively for balance and deftness. Another might prefer more weight (perhaps he's worried about the blade being broken when encountering cutting swords)--his blade is 42 inches and balanced okay, but it's heavier. A cut is going to hurt, if properly applied. OTOH, it'll be harder to hold his point on line if the fight gets long, and certain actions (i.e. cavationi) won't be as nimble.

What exactly do you mean by "whipping?" The cut Fabris and Alfieri describe are clearly draw-cuts, not just a "flick of the wrist". They give instructions on what part of the blade should make initial contact, and how much of the blade should be drawn across the impact area. I can't imagine Capoferro, Fabris and Alfieri all including cutting techniques if they were totally useless. Alfieri, in particular seems fond of cuts just below the knee and on the forearm.

But don't think that I'm advocating using a lot of cuts with the rapier. Really, the only time I use them are in situations where my opponent has voided my point, I've voided his and he keeps coming (especially with rapier & dagger). I don't want to come to grips, and I want to stop him from withdrawing his point and re-thrusting with impunity while I try to withdraw and get my point on line. A nice cut to the head works well in this situation. What would it do in real life? Probably not stop the fight--but my opponent might be a little more hesitant when charging in (not to mention the blood from a head-cut).

Steve