I’ve been looking at some “Cut-and-thrust” swords recently. I’ve been shocked at how narrow the last third of the sword is. I know it needs to be fairly narrow for thrusting but many of these swords seem to be just a rapier with a little more metal then needed(I know that there are many types of rapiers, in this case I’m talking about what most people think of when they hear rapier... The Three Musketeers). Though I don’t know much about swords, it would seem like a real “Cut-and-Thrust” would have a blade ore like an XVIIIb. When I see Albion's Regent I think: “their is a sword that can do it all.” I may be completely wrong but I was wondering if any of you had thought this way about a C&T sword and an XVIIIb blade.

Yes, I've been similarly surprised.

In looking around for swords suitable for use with George Silver's Paradoxes (purely out of curiosity), I've been surprised to see that everything which seems long enough according to Silver's guidelines (36" blade or so) seems either to lack the necessary cutting heft (given his appreciation for the cut) or else the kind of hand-protecting hilt he demands. I've seen swords with one or the other, but not both.

I don't really know anything about all this, so I'll be interested to see what others have to say.

Hi!

There is book you may find helpful. It's written by John Clements of the ARMA titled " Renaissance Swortdsmanship" and addresses differences between the "cut and thrust" and the rapier. It's published by Paladin Press and I bought my copy from Amazon. It offers some insightful interpretations on the developement and use of rapiers, small swords, and cut and thrust swords. I like the Regent, too. Albion indicates it was designed more as a long sword, and from what I've read on this forum, it's a very good cutter and thruster as well. Several far more knowledgable forumites could help you with this as well. Clements tends to confirm your conclusions. Hope this helps.

Cheers!

Hi,
FYI, the term "cut and thrust" sword is the term for a much later period style of sword. It is incorrectly applied to Rennaisance weapons. A slightly more accurate term is edge sword/spada da filo, though truthfully these were primarily just referred to as swords in period.

But when looking for any cutting weapons from the time period, you will find a wide variety of blade types, from broad bladed to narrow, needle-like points. Just as in other time periods, there is no one standard type of blade.

Here're a few from the albums on this site. There are others as well.

http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/photo/1097.html

http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/photo/4207.html

http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/photo/1287.html

http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/photo/4210.html

http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/photo/881.html

http://www.myArmoury.com/albums/photo/833.html

Hi R.D.,

Quote:

There is book you may find helpful. It's written by John Clements of the ARMA titled " Renaissance Swortdsmanship" and addresses differences between the "cut and thrust" and the rapier.

Unfortunately, while the book was very well intentioned, it is very out of date. Much of the information in the book is factually incorrect, and almost all of the techniques are based on pure conjecture. This isn't meant as an affront to the author, John Clements. It's just that at the time he wrote it there wasn't a lot of information available, and he was trying to show that such martial arts existed without the luxury of the translated texts that are publically available today. It was definately a trailblazer for it's time, but unfortunately today it has more myths than facts in it.

Thank you, Bill! This is one of the things I love about this forum. Well, edit..select all...delete- and back to the book shelf!