Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - Very Old Firangi with Rapier blade in need of restoration.

katana · 2nd December 2007, 02:53 PM

Hi Fernando and William .M, thank you for your input

The Rapier 'evolved' very rapidly from the 16th C, having a thick, long blade with cutting edges and a sharp point. By the late 17thC most of the blades had become much thinner, lighter and with the sharp point were designed for the thrust only. The blade on this Firangi fits this description. The origin of the blade is difficult to find, as the blade shape and cross section was common to English, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese made blades of the mid to late 17thC.

Hi Fernando, you are correct. As the blade was designed to 'thrust' it is unlikely the sword was used two handed to strike (cut) by using the pommel 'spike'. However, I still believe, that originally, this sword had one. I have read that sometimes European swordsman would hold a rapier by the pommel, effectively 'lenghening' the reach of the blade tip. Done quickly and covertly an opponent that was safe in the knowledge that he was just 'out of reach' ...suddenly wasn't

The pommel spike would 'add' this advantage. Also, you could argue that if the sword was used two handed the force of the thrust would be much greater.Stone in 'A Glossary .....Arms and Armour...' shows a Firangi with a thin, long Rapier blade with the pommel spike.

Rapiers were 'hilt' heavy, to allow greater control of the tip of the blade, the pommel spike would also enhance this necessary 'balance'.

The effectiveness of the Rapier in battle conditions is debateable. Writers of the time (16th-17thC) had varying views on the subject. Used from horseback seems the most 'popular', presumably because of its greater blade length. However, the Rapier would be ineffective against full armour.

As Rapier blades were lighter than many swords of the time ( and not strong enough, to directly parry a heavy blade) a 'companion' was used in the left hand to parry blows from an opponents sword. In Europe the 'main gauche' (dagger), a buckler (small shield) or a cloak (wrapped around the arm to cushion the blow or waved about to confuse and deceive your assailant) were used.
Common sense suggests that the Indian swordsman that used this Firangi probably used a dagger or a Dhal in the opposite hand. Traditionally a Dhal would be used with a Talwar or similar, and would imagine that the dhal would be the favoured choice.

Rapier use tends to be skilled, relying on accurate, lethal thrusts to major organs and the head. Apparently a thrust to a depth of a few inches in specific bodily areas would be 'fatal'. It was not unheard of that two combatants 'charging' at each other would 'run each other through' (ouch!!

) .. a depth of a few inches could easily be achieved, thin and flexable enough to penetrate the rib cage (deflecting around bone in certain situations)

http://www.thearma.org/Youth/rapieroutline.htm
http://swordforum.com/articles/ams/char-rapier.php
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~wew/fencing/blades.html

How was this sword used in India...... why would the Indians adopt a totally alien sword? Did it find a niche/function in the armoury that the other weapons could not fulfil ..... or was it just that it was 'different' ?

Any thoughts?

Kind Regards David

2nd December 2007, 02:53 PM	#9
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	Hi Fernando and William .M, thank you for your input The Rapier 'evolved' very rapidly from the 16th C, having a thick, long blade with cutting edges and a sharp point. By the late 17thC most of the blades had become much thinner, lighter and with the sharp point were designed for the thrust only. The blade on this Firangi fits this description. The origin of the blade is difficult to find, as the blade shape and cross section was common to English, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese made blades of the mid to late 17thC. Hi Fernando, you are correct. As the blade was designed to 'thrust' it is unlikely the sword was used two handed to strike (cut) by using the pommel 'spike'. However, I still believe, that originally, this sword had one. I have read that sometimes European swordsman would hold a rapier by the pommel, effectively 'lenghening' the reach of the blade tip. Done quickly and covertly an opponent that was safe in the knowledge that he was just 'out of reach' ...suddenly wasn't The pommel spike would 'add' this advantage. Also, you could argue that if the sword was used two handed the force of the thrust would be much greater.Stone in 'A Glossary .....Arms and Armour...' shows a Firangi with a thin, long Rapier blade with the pommel spike. Rapiers were 'hilt' heavy, to allow greater control of the tip of the blade, the pommel spike would also enhance this necessary 'balance'. The effectiveness of the Rapier in battle conditions is debateable. Writers of the time (16th-17thC) had varying views on the subject. Used from horseback seems the most 'popular', presumably because of its greater blade length. However, the Rapier would be ineffective against full armour. As Rapier blades were lighter than many swords of the time ( and not strong enough, to directly parry a heavy blade) a 'companion' was used in the left hand to parry blows from an opponents sword. In Europe the 'main gauche' (dagger), a buckler (small shield) or a cloak (wrapped around the arm to cushion the blow or waved about to confuse and deceive your assailant) were used. Common sense suggests that the Indian swordsman that used this Firangi probably used a dagger or a Dhal in the opposite hand. Traditionally a Dhal would be used with a Talwar or similar, and would imagine that the dhal would be the favoured choice. Rapier use tends to be skilled, relying on accurate, lethal thrusts to major organs and the head. Apparently a thrust to a depth of a few inches in specific bodily areas would be 'fatal'. It was not unheard of that two combatants 'charging' at each other would 'run each other through' (ouch!! ) .. a depth of a few inches could easily be achieved, thin and flexable enough to penetrate the rib cage (deflecting around bone in certain situations) http://www.thearma.org/Youth/rapieroutline.htm http://swordforum.com/articles/ams/char-rapier.php http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~wew/fencing/blades.html How was this sword used in India...... why would the Indians adopt a totally alien sword? Did it find a niche/function in the armoury that the other weapons could not fulfil ..... or was it just that it was 'different' ? Any thoughts? Kind Regards David Last edited by katana; 2nd December 2007 at 03:25 PM.