Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="med stud" data-source="post: 4069981" data-attributes="member: 1211">Rapiers were mainly developed as side arms, you didn't see many soldiers entering the field with a rapier in hand. The exception were sometimes cavalry but they often used pistols. About rapiers and plate mail: Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden was killed by a cuirassier who used a rapier. This was in the 1630s. The cuirassiers were the last of the armored cavalry to be used on the battle field. Their armor + weapons weighed about 140 pounds and covered the entire body. So rapiers and plate armour have existed in the same time.Also, one handed swords were generally not meant to be used against plate armour at all. A stabbing sword may have a better chance of piercing at the joints of plate armour than a wider sword but it's not something most people waged their lives on. The standard tactics against heavy plate were two handed weapons, fire arms, wrestling + daggers or numerior superiority (plus wrestling and daggers).All in all, people payed humongous amounts of cash for those armours because they worked. If a hobo with a rapier could take down a wearer of full plate by piercing a joint, noone would use plate. The armours of the cuirassiers shouldn't be confused with the tournament armours. When people think of armours you can't move in, they generally think about the armours that were just used in formalized jousts and not in combat.As for chain vs rapier: the one wearing the chain would have a defenitive edge. The main factor against chain mails in the age of rapiers was an issue of cost. Most battles were decided by pole arms and fire arms and chain is not a very good protection against any of them. On a "private" level, people used chain shirts into the 19th century if they were afraid of being knifed or stabbed by swords.</blockquote>

Verification