Hi Dana,
Again, there are typically no set specifications per se' for classification terminology (they are more 'guidelines' ), and one of the most frustrating issues is that semantics and parlance are often at play with descriptions . The term rapier is of course associated with the thin thrusting swords such as cuphilts and swept hits and thought of in fencing and dueling. The term broadened somewhat at the opening of the 18th century (much as the blades) when these typically civilian hilts became more prevalent in military circumstances. The hilts often remained much the same but the heavier blades were 'arming' swords so vernacular terms became entwined.
The term broadsword for example is typically regarded as meaning double edged, however in the 18th century the term was often universally used for both single and double edged swords. "By the Sword" by Cohen, and "Schools and Masters of Fence",by Egerton Castle, often touch on these curious terminology conundrums .
I prefer to classify using more descriptive terms rather than the general classifications which as can be seen, are not always properly used. For the colonial cuphilts I would use probably 'Spanish colonial cuphilt' and describe the blade. Classifications using strictly categorized terms are often better used with required descriptive qualification to define variation.
|