![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,192
|
![]() Quote:
Very well noted Philip, and indeed the case for shorter and more effectively proportioned swords seems as you say, well represented in the southern areas of America (Louisiana, Florida etc) and the 'Caribbean'hilt (as termed by Peterson) did have shorter, stout blades. Just as some of my own observations which I add for comment more for general readership here, and are details which are of course well known by you, I would additionally suggest; A true rapier blade, thin and typically long, would be effectively useless in combat situations where high impact, and wildly variable circumstances would probably break it almost immediately. These were suited only for one on one more controlled interaction in fencing and dueling. The large cup hilt or any heavily constructed hilt would be most inconvenient worn at the waist through a sash and these kinds of annoyances would likely have been attended to with less obtrusive carry methods. It seems like the scabbard carry configuration with such rapiers typically had the hilt outward and forward toward more horizontal plane. On another note regarding hilt size outside rapiers, the British heavy cavalry M1796 sword with the heavy full disc guard was eventually regarded as a nuisance as the disc reportedly chafed uniforms. The remedy was to cut down the inner side of the disc. This seems odd as these swords were usually worn with dramatically long straps in the flamboyant Napoleonic hussar convention of almost, if not actually , dragging the ground (hence the term 'drag' on the surround on the chape of the scabbard). The scabbard you have is an outstanding anomaly, as rapier scabbards in any case seem to have been fragile affairs which seldom survived through time while their steel and iron occupants of course did. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|