The issue is significantly confused by the fact that we do not know exactly to what kind of sword ( blade) a particular author is referring.
Was he having in mind a late Renaissance cut-and-thrust sword?
Or, the 17-18 century purely thrusting smallsword that continued to be called rapier by some despite the obvious dating and functional difference?
While the former could easily be used as a part of Indian Pata or Firangi, or even Khanda, the latter was totally unsuitable for that purpose.
Let’s not overestimate military/fencing sophistication of older linguists and even arms historians . After all, even now we can see definition of long and thin bronze Mycenaean swords as “rapiers”. Sure, they looked like swords that d’Artagnan wielded in countless Hollywood movies:-)
While the most popular origin of the word “rapier” is traced to the Spanish Espada Ropera ( dress sword), there were opinions that it stemmed from Greek ραπίζειν “ to strike”, or French /English raspiere/ rasper “scraper or poker”.
Language is a powerful tool to confuse us. Not for nothing Divine creation of multiple languages ended human project of building the Tower of Babel and why Americans and Brits are called two nations divided by a common language:-)
|