| myArmoury.com is now completely member-supported. Please contribute to our efforts with a donation. Your donations will go towards updating our site, modernizing it, and keeping it viable long-term. Last 10 Donors: Anonymous, Daniel Sullivan, Chad Arnow, Jonathan Dean, M. Oroszlany, Sam Arwas, Barry C. Hutchins, Dan Kary, Oskar Gessler, Dave Tonge (View All Donors) |
Author |
Message |
Risto Rautiainen
|
Posted: Wed 25 Jan, 2006 6:56 am Post subject: Per Brahe's two handed rapier |
|
|
Last summer I went to a museum exhibition about the life and travels of Per Brahe (Pietari Brahe in Finland). He was a Governor General in Finland in 1648-1654 and governed well, hence the exhibition. The most intriguing item at the exhibition was his two handed (!) rapier and it has been bothering me ever since. Sorry I don't have a pic, because photographing was prohibited, but I'll try to describe it. First of all it was long, about 150 cm (IIRC) and the wire wrpped handle was clearly long enough for twohanded use. It was cup hilted and had a narrow (maybe an inch at it's widest) blade of lenticular and fairly thick crossection. The tip of the sword was thin enough for moderate cutting. First I thought of it as just a peculiar oddity, something that would look cool in the exhibition, but then I read the item's description. Per had actually used the thing during his time in Poland and it had saved his life in battle. Because of that he wanted it to be present at his funeral, which it did. I tried to find a curator who would answer my questions, but I was in a hurry and it was a travelling exhibition anyways, so I doubt they wouldn't have had any more info than what the text had to say.
So does anyone have examples of other two handed rapiers or any clue how one would go on about using one? Half swording would be BTW great with that thing. Any other info about Per's sword would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Wolfgang Armbruster
|
Posted: Wed 25 Jan, 2006 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's one of the strangest weapons ever.
Like you describe it sounds more like a cup-hilted sharp estoc/tuck to me. Too bad you didn't take pictures.
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Wed 25 Jan, 2006 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If what you're describing is what I'm thinking of, I've seen pictures of these before. They seem to be late Renaissance, and the hilt looks very much like a modern foil with a grip to accomodate two hands. There's a picture of one, I believe, in Swords and Hilt Weapons (my books are in disarray at the moment, I'll check later).
I've wondered about their use myself. While I can take guesses, overall I'm unaware of any evidence that explains how such a weapon would be used or why.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Wed 25 Jan, 2006 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bill Grandy wrote: | There's a picture of one, I believe, in Swords and Hilt Weapons |
Found it. It's on page 65, if anyone has the book. This particular one is strange, as it actually looks like an epee with an extra grip stuck onto the normal one to extend it. The caption says it's German, c. 1645, and that the blade is by the Solingen maker Meves Berns. These types of swords are very rare, so it's interesting that Per not only used one but carried it into combat. I wish you were allowed to take pictures!
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Wed 25 Jan, 2006 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, I don't have a scanner, but here's a quick photo of it.
Attachment: 8.24 KB
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Did the sword look anything like this?
If so, I think I have actually handeled this wepon. It belongs to the armoury of Skokloster. Per Brahe´s Broher´s son, Nils Brahe inherited this castle from his uncle. Skokloster is a fantastic place and I have been generosly met by Bengt Kylsberg, the head of collections at many visits over the years. In the armouries are some incredible weapons. And *many*...
I have drawn the sword from memory, so it is not incredibly exact, just to give an idea and possible idetification for this thread. The hilt (of French or Dutch style?) is blackened and has a grip long enough for two hands. The blade is very long: I´d say slightly over one meter (about 105-110 cm?). The cross section is oval (without any edge at all) and completely blunt for the most part of the blade. The point is sharp. I don´t really remember how far back the sharp edge reaches from the point, but I think it was a short section of sharp edge behind the point.
I think it has a short fuller in the forte.
It has a strong prescence, feeling sturdy and dependable. You won´t cut with it, but it will surely thrust with ease. You could also use it for whacking someone sensless, breaking bones and faces.
Edit:
After reading Risto´s intial post again, some more things to add. As to use, it would have been used from horseback. The lenght of the grip is strange as two handed use of a tuck from horseback does not make much sense (short lance?). Perhaps it is to allow for balanceing of the very long blade (with some possible back up for two handed use in melé?).
The blade could well be as long as 120 cm or so (my initial estimate was a bit timid), with a hilt of some 25 cm total.
Attachment: 50.21 KB
Last edited by Peter Johnsson on Thu 26 Jan, 2006 3:28 am; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bill Grandy wrote: | Sorry, I don't have a scanner, but here's a quick photo of it. |
This one is also in the Skokloster armoury. Or one exactly like it. It feels strange to hold. Very light blade. Like holding some two handed tuck, but without the sturdiness.
To me it gives an impression of being a conversational peice or perhaps something experimental. Can´t really tell. The blade is sharp (if I rmember correctly). Cannot remember if the cross section is diamond or triangular.
The hilt does not give a very sturdy impression. This one never made a strong impression on me, so my memory is shady. I have dismissed it as a result of one of the stranger expresions of the 17th C mind. Perhaps that is underserved?
|
|
|
|
Risto Rautiainen
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bill Grandy wrote: | Bill Grandy wrote: | There's a picture of one, I believe, in Swords and Hilt Weapons |
Found it. It's on page 65, if anyone has the book. |
Should have known. I have that book, but it has been on loan for my brother for 1,5 years for his high school paper on swords. Well I'm glad that at least someone has access to that book
Thanks for posting that pic, now we have three examples of twohanded rapiers, because what Peter drew is not the same sword that was in the exhibition (sorry and thanks Peter ). Per's sword has a very plain cuphilt almost like the one in Swords and Hilt Weapons (but no decorations at all) and the handle is very much like what Peter drew (so no distinct two handles). All in all it looked very no-nonsense and businesslike. This one did have an edge all the way to the hilt and the blade was lenticular all the way and flattened to be quite thin at the last 10 cm of the blade near the tip. And yes, what struck me was that it was very long, the blade, just like Peter said, being about 120cm and the hilt about 25cm. This is just an estimation, because the sword was behind a glass.
The use still bothers me, but it seems that the Brahe family had some sort of affection for this type, if two members of their family has owned one!
|
|
|
|
Wolfgang Armbruster
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe that design was an attempt to combine the advantages of the rapier and the longsword.
I can't really figure out how that was supposed to work.....
|
|
|
|
Mikko Kuusirati
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Peter Johnsson wrote: | This one is also in the Skokloster armoury. Or one exactly like it. It feels strange to hold. Very light blade. Like holding some two handed tuck, but without the sturdiness.
To me it gives an impression of being a conversational peice or perhaps something experimental. Can´t really tell. The blade is sharp (if I rmember correctly). Cannot remember if the cross section is diamond or triangular.
The hilt does not give a very sturdy impression. This one never made a strong impression on me, so my memory is shady. I have dismissed it as a result of one of the stranger expresions of the 17th C mind. Perhaps that is underserved? |
I've been wondering about that one... judging by the photo in S&HW, it looks to me like, perhaps, someone took a normal rapier and simply replaced the pommel nut with a second grip. Having seen it first-hand, would you deem that a possibility?
(Also, "Shoe Cloister"? I'd love to hear the story behind that name. )
"And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
— Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum
|
|
|
|
Caleb Hallgren
Location: DeKalb, IL Joined: 01 Aug 2004
Posts: 64
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It certainly doesn't look all that sturdy.......
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Thu 26 Jan, 2006 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Caleb Hallgren wrote: | It certainly doesn't look all that sturdy....... |
I guess it depends on whether the tang goes all the way through or not.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
Axel Pettersson
Location: Göteborg, Sweden Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 14
|
Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My first guess was that it could give the user some surprise reach, but I know little on rapier usage and can't back that up. To use it mounted seems like a more probably idea (to me atleast), it could explain the length, and the fact that it was used in battle (like a light lance more than a sidearm, someting Im under the impression thrusting rapiers seldom were in battle). I saw a similar straight sabre with a very long blade, I think here on myArmoury ( Polish I think, about the time for the battle at Vienna where the Ottomans were stopped, cant find the link, but it wasnt posted too long ago), that was used on horseback, it could be the same concept.
|
|
|
|
Jonathon Janusz
|
Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Peter, if you felt like pounding out a pair of these weapons when you're bored some weekend, I'm sure there would be a couple of folks lined up behind me to volunteer for some experimental archaeology in regards to their use.
Seriously, though, this design is now on my list.
|
|
|
|
Anthony Densmore
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 5
|
Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First of all, I apologize in advance for any glaring evidence of ignorance.
I am here to learn.
To that end, I have a quesiton about this oddity.
Would the double-handed use of a rapier like this be detrimental in the loss of the off-hand for parrying, or would the added hand provide enough manouverability to compensate for such?
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anthony Densmore wrote: | Would the double-handed use of a rapier like this be detrimental in the loss of the off-hand for parrying, or would the added hand provide enough manouverability to compensate for such? |
Most masters considered the off-hand parry as a back up rather than a main defense, so I would say no, it wouldn't be detrimental. Furthermore, longsword often uses the off-hand for certain techniques (not to parry, of course!).
I don't feel that the added hand would provide any extra manouverability, but rather leverage. I know one of you engineers is about to correct my poor memory of mechanical properties, but a two handed sword would be a type 1 lever, whereas a single handed sword would be a type 3 lever. This would give the two handed sword the advantage when the blades engage. On the other hand, holding a sword with one hand allows for greater reach (by using the second hand, the front shoulder has to retract). Does having the extra hand on the rapier give it enough of an advantage over a one handed one that it is worthwhile? Clearly someone thought so, but it didn't appear to be a popular idea.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
Jared Smith
|
Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bill Grandy wrote: | [ I know one of you engineers is about to correct my poor memory of mechanical properties, but a two handed sword would be a type 1 lever, whereas a single handed sword would be a type 3 lever. This would give the two handed sword the advantage when the blades engage. . |
I'm impressed you actually know levers by classic types as most engineers don't. Sword strokes don't actually use a fulcrum (except in bind) so it is a wierd analogy to start with. The two handed sword grip seems to me to be most analogous with the action of a broom which is a class 3 lever. Class I is more like a pure fulcrum as in a wheel or knob that ha effort exerted equally from both sides of the pivot point. The single handed sword might be debated as class II or III.
http://www.sirinet.net/~jgjohnso/levers.html
Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence!
|
|
|
|
Korey J. Lavoie
Location: New Hampshire, USA Joined: 06 Apr 2006
Posts: 63
|
Posted: Tue 27 Feb, 2007 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
What comes to my mind is that a sword of this unusual type would be used with a heavy emphasis on half-swording technique. Perhaps even gripped with both hands on the blade, using it in a manner similar to a spear?
From the hundred year war
To the Crimea
With a Lance and a Musket and a Roman Spear
To all of the Men who have stood with no fear
In the Service of the King
-The Clash: The Card Cheat
|
|
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
Posted: Tue 27 Feb, 2007 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jared Smith wrote: |
Sword strokes don't actually use a fulcrum (except in bind) so it is a wierd analogy to start with.
|
I'd agree with Jared on that. Speaking of a fulcrum makes sense when it is not part of you... Your hands are what gives the force anyhow, the main difference between one handed and two handed use is that by lengthening the grip, you are able to exert more torque, even if applying the same forces. There is also the fact that with a one handed grip, the torque is caused by the wrist muscles, whereas with a two handed grip, the wrists do not have to work that much, and you can have torque by acting with your shoulders or even hips. That's how you are able to handle even a staff with barely two fingers of each hand.
About those strange two-handed rapiers, it's true that you gain leverage, but on the other hand you lose some reach, and your body's position is perhaps more dangerous for a thrust fight, being less profiled. Bit of speculation here, as I never used such things... Or fought against them, obviously
Regards
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Tue 27 Feb, 2007 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jared Smith wrote: | I'm impressed you actually know levers by classic types as most engineers don't. |
What can I say, I'm a wealth of nerddom. I didn't even realize this was a classic type... I just vaguely remember from high school physics (and I have to admit that I did have to google it to make sure I had the correct types).
Quote: | Sword strokes don't actually use a fulcrum (except in bind) |
I agree, and that's exactly what I was talking about: At the bind. I said above that this would give the two handed sword the advantage when the blades engage (i.e. when the blades are touching).
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|