Rapier Reach

[Durgil]

Since the length of a rapier is listed in the book to be 46" to 56", shouldn't it be considered long with regards to its reach, not medium as it says in the book?

[Caz]

For that length I'd say definitely, though you could certainly get one with a medium reach....

[Durgil]

Should they have the optional two-handed use like the bastard and long sword?

[Jake Norwood]

A long-reach rapier would be fine; many were really about the same length as a greatsword. No two-handed rules, though. It's not a swinging weapon!

Jake

[Salamander]

A long-reach rapier would be fine; many were really about the same length as a greatsword. No two-handed rules, though. It's not a swinging weapon!

Jake

Not to mention the hilt on even the earliest designs were not really made to accomodate two hands. The rapier is a weapon with a blade which can cut in some of the earlier forms, just not nearly as well as an arming sword or cut and thrust sword. Later rapiers were basically a very long stiletto with a quatrefoil or trefoil blade (distal cross section of the blade looked like a four pointed or three pointed star) to increase rigidity in the thrust. These later weapons could also cut, but you would get a deeper cut from a pen knife I'm afraid.

Besides, a free hand is a good thing when fighting with rapiers, trust me on this!

[Durgil]

So should bastard and long swords not account for two-handed use when they are being used to thrust with?

[Salamander]

So should bastard and long swords not account for two-handed use when they are being used to thrust with?

Well, I have trained a bit with both and I would say that they are pretty well modeled as they are. You see the statisitcs for one handed and two handed use are entered seperately on the tables and have got this covered.

[Durgil]

Later rapiers were basically a very long stiletto with a quatrefoil or trefoil blade (distal cross section of the blade looked like a four pointed or three pointed star) to increase rigidity in the thrust.

This sounds very similiar to the estoc.

[Salamander]

This sounds very similiar to the estoc.

Yes, the estoc and later rapiers share similar design philosophies. However the estoc was more created as an evolution from the bastard sword. This is seen in the evolution of the blade geometries of the weapons as we go from lenticular distal cross section to hexagonal and finally to diamond as the blade went from one optimized for cutting to a pointier and pointier blade. Soon there was bo real mass on the forward end of the blade to make it a serious cutter and the next natural step was to basically make a pointy crowbar with a hilt.

Examples:
http://www.armor.com/2000/catalog/item913.html

Here they use the English nomenclature of "tuck" which is a bastardization of the continental word "estoc".

[Valamir]

Also, if memory serves correctly, the estoc was intended for mounted use, where the rapier, of course, is generally a foot weapon.

[Salamander]

Also, if memory serves correctly, the estoc was intended for mounted use, where the rapier, of course, is generally a foot weapon.

I have never heard about this, but it would be interesting to look into...

[Jake Norwood]

There were some later estocs for mounted use (Ralph--your Polish Husar book should have some shots of 'em. They'll have a saber hilt). As a general rule, however, estocs from the time period we're discussing were footman's weapons. From what we know, Knights fought *a lot* more on foot than previously thought.

Also, re: 2-hands on the rapier

Yes, I suppose that by gripping with the second hand somewhere you could get a more powerful thrust, but the weapon isn't made for that kind of use. Perhaps increase the damage a little bit in such a situation.

Fun stuff.

Jake

[Valamir]

There were some later estocs for mounted use (Ralph--your Polish Husar book should have some shots of 'em. They'll have a saber hilt).

Quite a few actually.  Pretty much a standard part of the hussar's kit.  Near as I can tell they were held with the blade extended forward and employed like a lance during subsequent charges where the lance was already broken.  They were prefered to the ubiquitous sabre against more heavily armored German and Swede opponents.

Since no distinction was made of these being specially adapted estocs I assumed that it was standard to employ them from horseback.

It actually is even more interesting to discover that the Poles took a perfectly serviceable foot weapon and adapted it to mounted combat at a time when most of the rest of Europe was moving away from mounted combat.  Another confirmation point for the (eventually detrimental) Polish obsession with cavalry.

[Ashton]

You can place your off hand on the pommel of the rapier to drive the thrust home... but you lose on range since you can't throw the blade out as far as you might want to.

Some earlier rapiers (Agrippa period) were designed around a school that was based off of a cutting as opposed to a true thrusting style. Hitting with the tip was still a bit more effective, but there are some nice vessels (neck, armpits, inside of the thighs) where a deep cut is not as necessary.

Some "later period" rapiers still had a cutting element- Spanish schools seemed to like it quite a bit. Probably more interesting is the evolution of same- Italian rapier was designed for street fighting (esp. the earlier styles), French smallsword for court (though there was also a "street style"), and Spanish was based around geometric principles.

[Caz]

Just curious, what're the differences between estocs designed for foot and mounted combat?  I can't imagine there being such differences.....
    I know weight isn't a factor.  I've handled a 50" estoc, and they just dont have the mass of a cutting blade despite their thick section.  You couldn't even beat someone down with one, only strike to lacerate bare flesh like a true rapier.