quinta-feira, 15 de dezembro de 2016
domingo, 27 de novembro de 2016
sexta-feira, 25 de novembro de 2016
quarta-feira, 23 de novembro de 2016
terça-feira, 22 de novembro de 2016
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RAPIER
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RAPIER by Chris Evans
The rapier appeared in the early renaissance and was a civilian weapon. Contrary to popular belief, by modern standards it was a heavy and cumbersome sword, capable of attacks only and ill-suited to defense, a role usually relegated to the left hand or an auxiliary implement held in it. In time it evolved into the small-sword, a shorter and much faster weapon, one equally capable of attack and defense.1. OVERVIEW
Introduction
The term rapier was adopted in England, from sources unknown, though it is much speculated upon, and is used to describe a civilian's thrusting sword intended for dueling and self defense. The word had no counterpart on the continent where such weapons were simply referred to as dress swords, swords, or side swords and its indiscriminate use has led to much confusion (1)
The rapier era may be divided into three distinct periods, namely early, middle and late. The early period, up to Marozzo's time in the middle 16th century, was characterized by the usage of heavy cut and thrust rapiers. During the middle period, rapiers came of age; Sword dimensions stabilized (2) the thrust gained prominence, though the cut was retained to some extent and the masters of this era, exemplified by Capo Ferro (late 16th century), had a distinctly modern outlook, holding that the sword was alone sufficient for defense and that technique should be developed in the direction of gaining "time" (loosely, initiative) rather than pre-attack preparation. The late rapier era, also known as the transition period, was relatively short, from about 1650 to 1680, and is remembered by the shift from single to double time fencing (3); During these closing years the cup hilt made its appearance, probably in response to ever tighter swordplay, blades got shorter, lighter and the cut as well as defense with the left hand were abandoned, at least in principle.
To understand these swords a thorough examination of their characteristics must be made and this paper addresses this need, meandering off here and there into related subject matters.
The Ascendancy Of The Rapier
At the end of the middle ages, the feudal system was in decline and the bourgeois, town dwellers, as a class became wealthier and more influential. As such they felt that part of their assertion required the right to redress slights. This was the background to the then new custom of dueling. Since early duels were often spontaneous "on the spot" affairs, the practice presupposed the routine bearing of a suitable weapon by all those who aspired to this privilege. And it so came about, that those who had a reputation to defend took to the wearing of a sword as part of their daily apparel.
Though there is much debate as to the origins of the rapier, it probably evolved from the broadsword, but its development must have been at least influenced by the medieval thrusting swords used against armour; This argument is plausible, if for no other reason than that thrusting swords, such as the estoc, raised the awareness of swordsmen regarding the potential of the point.
In Italy, at the beginning of the 16th century, as the custom of wearing light armour, mostly mail, declined, swordsmen noticed that many parts of the body could be attacked successfully with the point, parts less accessible to the edge and thus the thrust begun to be increasingly emphasized. This led to the then cut oriented fighting being challenged and replaced by a new style of swordplay, that of foining, also known as fencing (from defense). The swords used were modified so as to better suit them to this kind of usage, and thus the rapier came into existence. Notwithstanding the success of the rapier, civilian use of heavy cutting swords lingered on, most notably in Scotland, where they were much favoured until the 19th century.
Rapiers Were Heavy & Slow
Contrary to popular belief, from a modern perspective, rapiers were rather long, heavy (2) and slow swords; In fact, rapiers were as heavy as most single handed swords of the day, and heavier than modern cavalry sabres. In contrast, later small-swords had a weight about one third of that of a rapier.
That the opposite perception prevails is attributable mostly to the 19 century novelists who projected onto the renaissance the vastly faster sword play of their own age; This trend was further accentuated by the motion picture industry which has and continues to present rapiers as capable of all the adroit blade to blade actions of the modern sport fencing weapons (4).
The reason behind the rapier's heft were numerous, but probably the main one was that it was initially opposed by heavy weapons and thus blades had to be sufficiently robust to withstand their onslaught. In any event, it was this weight, plus the long blade, that imparted to the rapier a slowness of point that restricted it to fencing in single time.
Whilst the rapier may have been an acceptable dueling weapon, George Silver's (5) objections notwithstanding, its long blade must have placed it at a disadvantage in self defense situations; It was slow to draw and difficult to maneuver in crowded or tight settings. Nevertheless it offered sufficient advantages, over the alternatives, to make it the weapon of choice for over a century and a half.
Rapiers as Cutters
Before embarking on an examination of this subject, it is well to remember that the edges possessed by most rapiers served purposes additional to that of imparting percussion cuts; They facilitated blade entry and also tended to make it riskier to seize the blade with the hand.
The rapier's cutting ability has been the subject of much debate, but it is undeniable that early rapier play, up to Marozzo, involved a considerable amount of cutting; Blades belonging to this era were wide and heavy, resembling the broadswords of that age. In contrast, late rapier fencing was characterized by a near complete or total disregard for the cut and correspondingly swords reflected this shift of emphasis by way of slender stiff blades with far less pronounced or completely absent edges. During the middle rapier era, blades were sharp but only the end of the blade was used for making light cuts and, according to E.Castle, the best swordsmen entirely ignored cutting.
Even the early cut and thrust rapiers, when compared to broadswords, were comparatively poor cleavers and this trait could only deteriorate as the point gained favour. Some of the reasons for this were:
a) The wide angle of the cutting edge, dictated by the rapier's narrowness and double edges, made for too much displacement of the material being cut, thus limiting the blade's penetration;
b) rapiers lacked sufficient blade density for effective percussion;
c) the long blade had a centre of percussion (6) far removed from the point and the "sweet spot" around it was short;
d) the balance required for effective point control shifted the moment of mass towards the hilt, away from the COP; and
e) the grip used with rapiers was better suited for point control than edge placement.
Thus the only cuts that could be effectively delivered with rapiers, were two in kind: The draw and tip cuts. There is no evidence to suggest that the draw cut found much application, though cuts with the extremity enjoyed considerable popularity, albeit in a secondary role to the thrust. Nevertheless the renaissance fencing masters felt that a cut was appropriate, mostly against the head or face, but only if:
a) The opponent's point had been sufficiently displaced to preclude a time hit in return; and
b) would not waste a move, thus gaining fencing "time".
However once the Colichemarde (7) made its appearance, displaced points could be realigned with such speed that any attempt to make a tip, or any cut was to court a near certain time hit.
The Balance Of Rapiers (8)
This much neglected, but vitally important attribute is the key to understanding this weapon. The fencing masters of old told us very little on this subject and what we are left with is the evidence presented by museum collections and our attempts to recreate old rapier play.
It is debatable whether point heaviness favours fencing in single time, though it certainly assists cutting and most rapiers were cutters as well as thrusters; However the rapier's dimensions and resultant balance were such it could only allow this kind of play. For about 160 years a self perpetuating cycle persisted, because the advantages of double time fencing were slow in being recognized and in the meanwhile swordsmiths continued to produce long point heavy weapons that corresponded to the then accepted norms. However, towards the later part of the 17th century little by little, it came to be seen that given a light blade with a fast point, a sword could be self sufficient for both attack and defense and expert swordsmen moved towards lighter and shorter swords; A significant part of this transition was the complete abandonment of the left hand in defense and that of the cut.
The Transition Rapier
Double time swordplay was not unknown to the middle era rapier masters, but given the heavy weapon of their day and the attendant risks, they could do no other than to disapprove of the practice. However, all along, some rapiers, particularly in France, were sufficiently light and short to allow some successful double time moves and thus this form of fencing not only refused to disappear but in time replaced the earlier and simpler play.
As the parry-riposte became increasingly accepted, the need for lighter swords became ever more apparent and a new rapier form appeared, known as the transition rapier. It was characterized by being shorter, lighter and less point heavy, permitting a restricted range of double time moves. However once the trend started, it was quickly taken to its logical conclusion, that of the Colichemarde and then the small-sword.
2. THE THRUST VERSUS THE CUT
Despite the resounding supremacy of the rapier's point over the broadsword's edge, it is not easy to account for the success of this kind of swordplay and the issue of the thrust against the cut remains a vexed subject to this day. George Silver did not think much of the thrust, though these days the superiority of the point is considered axiomatic and is usually justified as follows:
a) A displaced point can be re-aligned faster than an edge;
b) a sword raised for a cut leaves the body exposed to a counter thrust;
c) the point reaches the target faster than the edge because it travels in a straight line, whereas the later has to move in a curved path; and
d) the thrust is deadlier than the cut.
The first point is valid enough as far as later fencing swords are concerned, but applies far less to the much longer and heavier rapier; It was in fact the rapier's slowness of point realignment that granted sufficient time to occasionally cut rather than thrust.
The second and third contentions, on closer examination, show up as specious; This is because both rapiers and cutting swords were, more often than not, used with the left hand providing the defense and, in any event, neither the edge nor the point were offered or delivered from the same distance.
The argument that thrusts inflict deadlier wounds than most cuts is true, but highly misleading; Discounting the odd fight brought to an end with a single thrust, the point killed by way of internal bleeding and infections, but lacked immediate "stopping power" against an enraged antagonist. In contrast, the cut dispensed shock effect proportional to the strength of the blow.
This lack of stopping power of rapiers was also commented on adversely by Silver and was borne out by numerous duels in which both protagonists were run through several times before the encounter was concluded. However it must be acknowledged that the thrust had superior trenchant power to the cut, which could be rendered ineffective by garments as light as wool coats (9).
An alternative explanation for the superiority of the point is that if the cut was largely dispensed with, as happened with the rapier, then it was possible to make a sword of such length that it could easily outreach the necessarily shorter cutting sword; And if this reach was additionally augmented by deliveries such as the pass or lunge, then attacks could be made from even further away.
Cuts had to be made from a much shorter measure and this would have compelled the broadswordsman to advance against the rapier, thus becoming highly predictable and prone to a time thrust.
There is plenty of evidence to support this second view: Right through the rapier era blades were significantly longer than broadswords, some reaching 1300mm; In contrast, few one handed cutting swords exceeded 900mm.
If the main superiority of the rapier's thrust over the cutting sword indeed lay in its reach, then we would expect it to diminish if the weapons were of equal length. This in fact occurred with the advent of the small-sword; From the 18th and 19th century we have evidence to suggest that when the military cut and thrust sabre was opposed by the small-sword, the blades being more or less of equal length, the outcome became unpredictable and the supposed superiority of the point was not evident. The work of Captain A.Hutton repeatedly demonstrated what Angelo also knew, that a military sabre could hold its own against a small-sword or a modern epee. Hutton attributed the sabre's success to the varied angles from which a cut could be delivered whereas the thrust is a good deal more predictable. Of course the point of the small-sword could still be delivered from afar thanks to the lunge and if displaced realigned quicker than the edge, but these advantages were negated by that once within distance the sword wielding arm became a target and the lighter blade's inability to make effective blade actions against the heavier sword.
Be that all as it may, the ascendancy of the point over the edge brought on a major paradigm shift in swordplay; Thrusting requires a different way of moving the body, because the point is delivered primarily by means of the legs. Also trying to get one's point past the opponents defenses encourages actions on his blade such as trying to push or beat it out of the way, paving the way to foining and ultimately to parrying and counterattacking. In time, this paradigm shift, the delivery of an attack via the legs and the dexterous action of blade upon blade, became the defining characteristic of Western European swordplay, influencing even the usage of military edged weapons.
3. MISCELLANEOUS
Rapier Hilts
As seen, the predominant use of the thrust brought with it increased blade to blade action and this demanded increased protection of the sword hand, something that in time was provided by the complex swept and later cup hilts. Up to the appearance of the rapier and for some time afterwards, all swords were considered to be, for most part, weapons of offense; This attitude change gradually and only as rapiers and broadswords became lighter and nimbler. The degree of hand protection offered by the hilt can be taken as a good indicator of the amount of defense expected from a sword, for it is the handguard which permits tight blade action without the risk of injury.
Throughout the rapier era, swordsmen, to gain a better control over their blades, were in the habit of wrapping their index finger over the quillon and the digit thus exposed was prone to injury - This did not present problems as long as the sword was not used for defense and thus the earlier rapiers had very simple cross quillons and, in some instances, finger guards. Later however, as blades increasingly clashed, the need for more protection was met by complex hilts with loops and bars enveloping the hand; In time this trend culminated in the broadsword's baskethilt and the rapier's cup hilt.
Left Hand Daggers etc.
Notwithstanding the hand protection provided by the hilt, because of the inertia of the rapier's comparatively long and heavy blade, effective parries in all lines could seldom be made and a considerable portion of the defense fell upon the left hand, on its own, or wielding a dagger, buckler or cape. Bucklers (small shields) and capes could parry thrusts as well as deflect cuts, but were of limited usefulness when fighting at close quarters. In contrast left hand daggers could deflect most thrusts, though not cuts, and also be used offensively. This last consideration was very important because many a fight was resolved with the dagger after an entanglement resulted on account of the of the rapier's very long blade.
Gloves with chain mail palms were also used for fending off thrusts, but were not popular because of their lack of usefulness in offense and against cuts.
It is worth mentioning a curious style of foining that involved using two rapiers, known as a case (of rapiers). It can be surmised that whilst the longer blade of the left hand weapon was better at intercepting incoming attacks than other alternatives, it could provide little protection at close quarters.
By the time of Capo Ferro, parrying with the left hand was considered obsolete, as he held that a rapier was self sufficient, though the practice lingered on under the justification of "facilitating" attacks. It must be remembered that daggers were used not just for parrying, but also as auxiliary weapons in brawls. It is worth noting that the practice of using a left hand dagger lingered on in Southern Italy into the 19th century; Also that the same Italians retained a distinct preference for time hits, ie fencing in single time, despite their adoption of the small-sword, albeit heavier than the French weapon.
Blade Geometry
The need for a long slender blade that combined lightness with stiffness was the great challenge for swordsmiths. Whilst the role played by the cross section was fairly well understood by the beginning of the 16th century, the great difficulty was forging and heat treating such a slender blade, without warpage; Something that was not completely solved until the 19th century with the advent of the cannelured epee blade. In any event, as long as cutting was retained, not all that much could be done and throughout the rapier era the most common blade section was that of a diamond, reflecting a narrow version of the double edged broadsword blade. Later, as cutting edges were gradually discarded, fullers, raised ribs and other stiff but light cross sections became increasingly common.
NOTES
(1) It is not possible to define a rapier on the strength of its appearance alone as it was fairly common to fit rapier hilts to various blades intended mostly for military use (*). Notwithstanding these difficulties, the term remains in common usage in English and for the purposes of this paper, to lend it a more precise meaning, is defined as:
`A single handed sword that inherently favours the thrust over the cut on account of its blade's shape and overall balance, yet permits fencing only in single time (3).
(*) The practice of fitting rapier hilts to military blades is perhaps best illustrated by some 18th century Spanish cavalry swords. The 1796 pattern had a striking resemblance to earlier rapiers and was referred to as such by English troops during the Iberian war.
Another striking example is the Eastern European armour piercing sword that complemented the cavalrymen's cutting sabre. It had a small-sword, or complex rapier hilt, but its long thrusting blade was very stiff and heavy — It was intended only for mounted use and was carried attached to the saddle.
(2) During the rapier era, that is between 1500 and 1680, though there was some spread in the dimensions, representative specimens averaged around 1250gms in weight and 1065mm in blade length. It is noteworthy that historical fencers report that blades shorter than 1000mm make fencing in period style difficult. For comparison, 18th century small-swords weighed on average 500gms and had 760mm blades.
(3) The great demarcator in the history of sword play was the transition from fencing in single to double time. In the former, the preferred tactic was to provoke an attack and counter into the opponent's offense, and (if necessary) blocking the path of the incoming blade with one's own; These days this type of counterattack is usually referred to as a time hit or a time hit with opposition. In contrast, in double time fencing, an incoming attack is first parried with the sword blade and then followed up with a counter attack (riposte). Of course, the above description is of single swords opposing each other; With left hand parrying implements, as was the rule, the action became more complex but still retained the same essential character described above.
It should be noted that full double time swordplay became possible only with the later and much lighter small-sword. If a parry-riposte is attempted with a heavy rapier then chances are that:
a) depending on the line of attack, the parry will not intercept the incoming blade in time; and
b) in those instances where the parry is successful, the opponent will have ample time to move out of the way of the riposte.
Because of the slowness of the rapier, ripostes were not a great threat and thus it was possible for duelists to move sideways when avoiding an attack and this was a defining characteristic of rapier play. Later, when rapid fencing in double time became the norm, the body could only be shifted safely backwards, away from an attack.
(4) A cursory examination of the films made during the swashbuckling era will reveal that stage rapiers used in the fight scenes were invariably epee blades mounted in rapier hilts.
(5) George Silver was a renaissance English swordmaster, active towards the end of Elizabeth the first's reign. He is often quoted because he was an implacable opponent of the rapier and all that it stood for; He deplored dueling and upheld the broadsword. He was opposed to the theories taught by the Italian masters who visited England, amongst whom the most prominent was V.Saviolo, on the grounds that foining with the point left too much to chance and was a flawed concept. A good many of Silver's objections reflected little more than reactionary conservatism, though some of his observations are worthy of consideration; His idea of what constitutes the "true fight" and the perceived shortcomings of the rapier are not without merit.
When reading Silver's works, the reader is advised to remember that the Elizabethan rapier was a very different weapon from its present day counterparts.
(6) Sword blades, being flexible, tend to oscillate and have vibrational nodes. If a swung blade hits the target at the node nearest its tip, it will vibrate less and this is the spot best suited to make a percussion (cleaving) cut. This is so because upon contact little of its kinetic energy will be dissipated through vibration. This point is known as the centre of percussion (COP).
The position of the COP and the "sweet spot" surrounding it are largely determined by the geometry of the blade and to a lesser extent, by factors such as the weight of the pommel. Generally, as sword blades gain in length and lose width, as with rapiers, the COP moves towards the midpoint and the sweet spot becomes shorter. A heavy pommel "pulls" the COP back towards the hilt.
Of course, very slender blades flex not only in the plane transverse to the edge, but also in the plane of its edge, though to a lesser degree. So this mode of flexing and attendant vibration has also to be taken into account when identifying the COP.
Though there are various methods for establishing the position of a sword blade's COP, the most practical is to cut into a fairly solid piece of wood, with varying degrees of force, and observe the resultant vibration, or lack of.
(7) Colichemardes, which appeared around 1680 and remained popular for the next 40 years, followed on the advances made by the transition rapier. It represented a curious, but successful, attempt at combining strong parrying ability with an agile point so as to allow fencing in double time; The concern with strong parrying probably addressed the then prevalence of heavier rapiers. The blades of these unusual swords commenced at the hilt with the proportions of a heavy rapier, but roughly one third towards the point abruptly changed to a very light cross section. The decline of the popularity of the Colichemarde was probably due to the disappearance of rapiers and thus the need for strong parrying; Against lighter small-swords it was at a small, but significant disadvantage. Also, when attempting to understand later developments it is helpful to remember that the advent of pocket pistols, for general self defense, permitted the greater specialization of swords for dueling.
(8) The balance discussed here refers to the leverage exerted by the weight of the blade ahead of the wrist's centre, the fulcrum, on the muscles used in wielding a rapier. It must be understood that it is this leverage, that exerts the most influence on the speed with which the point can be maneuvered. This varies with the grip used as well as the dimensions of the hand. To illustrate, gripping a rapier by wrapping the index finger shifts the pivot point of the wrist closer to the tip of the sword, by effectively shortening the blade, whilst an elongated large hand, or holding it with a "foil" grip has the opposite effect.
To permit comparisons, it is customary to measure a sword's balance point (BP) by resting it on say the edge of a ruler, at a point at which it will balance; Or put another way, at a point along its length at which the sum of its moments attributable to weight and length equal zero. The BP so obtained is usually expressed as a distance from the hand guard or as a percentage of the sword's overall length. In truth, only the measurement spanning the inner edge of the quillons adjacent to the hand, and not its forward projections, constitute a meaningful measurement. This is because:
a) The forward projections from the quillons varied from sword to sword and as a result no meaningful comparisons can be made of BPs measured from them; and
b) if the BP is expressed in terms of overall length, the portion of the handle that extends behind the hand is largely irrelevant in terms of the leverage exerted on the muscles, always assuming that the sword is gripped with the hands against the quillons.
A sword's BP is adjusted by attaching a counterweight to the end of its hilt, commonly known as a pommel. Because of the leverages involved, comparatively heavy adjustments to pommel weight have to be made to counter a small changes in blade length and or density. As a generalization, it is desirable to keep the weight of a single handed sword as light as possible so as to reduce fatigue of the sword arm.
In practice, there were practical limits as to how far rearwards the BP could be shifted on rapiers; Long blades were heavy, and most were expected to have a modicum of cutting ability. Of course, it was always possible to attach a huge pommel to a sword and thus bring its BP rearwards, but the price for this was invariably a substantial increase in weight as well as "pulling" the COP towards the hilt, and in any event, pommels weighing over 300gms were excessively bulky. It is worth mentioning that many late rapiers had blades of greatly reduced sectional density so as to facilitate a more rearward BP, but this approach had limits; It could be persuasively argued that the very short blade of the small-sword was arrived at, not because of fashion, as is at times suggested, but rather through the search for a BP closer to the hilt, the only way then known.
As already mentioned, rapier play, for most part, revolved around what is nowadays known as time hits with opposition or covered time hits; A fencer would counter thrust at his opponent just after the attack commenced and along the way the incoming blade had to be intercepted (with the opposition), to avoid a double hit. For this kind of fencing, a long blade was advantageous and it seems that so was a forward BP, because it, as claimed by re-enactors, made the opposition more effective. Obviously a compromise had to be struck between quickness of point and the ability to provide sufficient opposition, not to mention cutting ability and an acceptable weight. In the end, all of these considerations translated into a BP of around 100mm-200mm from the quillons, a fairly forward position compared to that of small-swords and modern epees (0-100mm); For further comparison, modern cavalry sabres balance around 150mm from the hilt.
The full significance of a more rearward BP was only realized in the 2nd half of the 17th century with the advent of the transitional rapier and the beginnings of fencing in double time (parry-riposte).
(9) During the English civil war, in the 17th century, it was shown that a leather coat offered sufficient protection against stray sword cuts. Also during the Crimean war, in the 19th century, British cavalrymen found that their sabres would not cut through their Russian opponent's woolen greatcoats.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Chris Evans is a retired professional metallurgist. A collector of edged weapons, Mr. Evan's special interests include the evolution of modern Western European and Japanese swordsmanship. He is currently involved in a study of the Spanish "Navaja".
Title rapier photo courtesy of Rob Miller of LionGate Arms & Armour.
Copyright © 2003 by Sword Forum International · See our Legal Information
Doug's Rapier Hilt Making
Doug's Rapier Hilt Making Page
Examples of my hilt-making attempts here and there.
Making a basic rapier hilt for SCA fencing combat.
Planning
It takes me about 10 to 12 hours per hilt. It helps to make about 4 hilts of the same model in a "batch." It seems like the pommel and grip take about an hour each, as well.
Find a picture of a nice two-ring or three-ring hilt to use as a pattern. I strongly recommend the two-ring.
the two-ring
That's what these instructions and sketches will cover. The best books that I've found so far for example pictures are "Cut and Thrust Weapons" by Edouard Wagner, and "European & American Arms" by Claude Blair. Wagner's book is the only one to show the back sides from some of the hilts. That makes it very important, especially for us beginners. That back side is tricky, and important.
In particular, study Plate 5 in Wagner's book.
Plate 6,
also Plate 9
and Plate 10
are very worthwhile too. In Blair, carefully examine Plate #120.
I photocopied it with an enlarging copier and then enlarged the first enlarged copy. I can make life-size pictures this way. It's easier to be sure it's really life size if the description of the sword tells the width of the cross-guard, though.
By the way, I found a very helpful product recently at a Ben Franklin Crafts store, in the sewing and quilting section. They had sheets of clear mylar plastic measuring 11" by 17" with 1/4" and 1/8" square grids printed on them. I put a sheet over the picture of the hilt I wanted to photo-copy and the enlarged copy came out with a reference grid printed on top of the sword. A sheet of the mylar costs $2.75. I went back and got a second sheet to cut in half so that it's about the same size as the book pages. I'll keep the first one full size to use for manually drawing enlarged copies of smaller pictures. This grid enlargement system is described in lots of woodworking books for enlarging their printed patterns to full construction size.
That mylar grid sheet really helps me to duplicate the proportions of the hilt more accurately. Otherwise it usually seemed like my hilts often looked a little too big. When cutting parts I'm always afraid of cutting them a little too small, so I wind up leaving them a little big so I can trim down later. But I never wind up trimming and so they end up a bit oversize.
A full size drawing or photocopy helps make a nice hilt. You can hold each piece up against the paper as you make it, correcting the size or curvature as necessary.
See the pictures of many of my hilts, too. There are a couple of dozen!
For a nice description of hilt parts and rapiers in general, got to
which is where I got this picture:
Gathering materials
Get a six or seven feet of 1/4 inch cold-rolled steel rod and at least 6" of 1/4" square bar. Key stock would be good for the square piece, but it's relatively expensive and usually plated with something that will become a poisonous vapor when you weld it. You can use more 1/4" round bar instead, but we'll need to change the instructions for that. The "no-square" instructions will come after. If you can find round 3/16" bar, it also makes a very nice, graceful looking hilt and it is quite a bit easier to bend and lighter in weight. For a fencing hilt, especially for lady fencers, 3/16" rod may be the better choice.
Forming
I do all my bending and forming with the steel cold. People often ask if I use a forge and heat the bars, but getting the steel red hot turns it black and pitted. It takes a lot of work to clean it up afterward. Also I find it very hard to hold on to red hot steel and bend it accurately. And these small bars cool off quite quickly, so you'd have to keep re-heating them, and the mandrel or form that you bend them over or around will also absorb heat from the bars and make them cool off even more quickly.
I made some rather crude sketches of the parts (‘Sketch1')
and their positions (‘Sketch2').
They're the links in the rest of this page. There are several different areas and parts on each sketch.
and their positions (‘Sketch2').
They're the links in the rest of this page. There are several different areas and parts on each sketch.
For the quillon size, I went by SCA rules, which allow a maximum of 11 inches total, tip to tip. That's a bit long on some design styles, though. If you make the first one with plain, smooth, straight bars then you can trim them shorter until you like them.
Another good way to check is to make a model of the hilt with heavy copper wire or old coathanger wire.
I've tried determining sizes of original, historical hilts but none of the picture books give anything but blade length for dimensions. I often figure that the grip is 3-1/2" and use that to estimate all the other sizes.
Cut off enough1/4 inch rod to make a circle 2 inches outside diameter and a circle 4 inches outside diameter. Or for a three-ring hilt, try 1-3/4", 3" and 4-1/2" circles. Be sure to make it long enough for bending, because there's usually some loss for unbent parts at the ends. I usually bend a part at the end of a 2 or 3 foot rod and then cut off that part. It's sometimes a lot easier to bend with that extra stock as a handle for bending leverage. Also cut two pieces 1 inch long and two pieces 1-½" long, which will become the blade tang stops
and the quillon block.
You will also need about 9 inches for the knuckle guard.
Bend the knuckle guard and then cut it off from the rod stock. I'd recommend starting with a hilt with a straight crossguard (quillons), but it's not too much harder to use curved ones. They're easier to weld up if they're straight. If you want them curved, also bend both quillons.
The quillons are easy to bend all in one piece and then separate them after they're bent. We also need two pieces bent into a “U" shape, 2 inches across and about 2 inches long to be the "pas d'anes"
if I have the term right. These pieces look good made of more of the 1/4" square stock, if you have enough. A slight variation to give a more graceful look is to make them more of a “J" shape.
See 'Sketch1' again. They are the loops that your first finger goes through when you hold the hilt for fencing. We still need 4 or 5 more pieces, mainly on the “back" side
of the hilt, which is the side opposite the rings. For me, the left side is the back side. But you will save a lot of trouble by waiting until these pieces we've already cut and bent are welded together before trying to cut and fit the rest. And they're awfully hard to describe.
and the quillon block.
You will also need about 9 inches for the knuckle guard.
Bend the knuckle guard and then cut it off from the rod stock. I'd recommend starting with a hilt with a straight crossguard (quillons), but it's not too much harder to use curved ones. They're easier to weld up if they're straight. If you want them curved, also bend both quillons.
The quillons are easy to bend all in one piece and then separate them after they're bent. We also need two pieces bent into a “U" shape, 2 inches across and about 2 inches long to be the "pas d'anes"
if I have the term right. These pieces look good made of more of the 1/4" square stock, if you have enough. A slight variation to give a more graceful look is to make them more of a “J" shape.
See 'Sketch1' again. They are the loops that your first finger goes through when you hold the hilt for fencing. We still need 4 or 5 more pieces, mainly on the “back" side
of the hilt, which is the side opposite the rings. For me, the left side is the back side. But you will save a lot of trouble by waiting until these pieces we've already cut and bent are welded together before trying to cut and fit the rest. And they're awfully hard to describe.
If you use long pieces of rod, you can bend them around a piece of pipe. If they're not long enough to get enough leverage to bend easily, then you need a bender. I normally use a bender like the Harbor Freight wire bender
I described on the tools page. I still cut pieces fairly long, or bend the ends of long ones, so that I don't have a lot of little, short scrap pieces left over.
I described on the tools page. I still cut pieces fairly long, or bend the ends of long ones, so that I don't have a lot of little, short scrap pieces left over.
For some more basic information about bending, go to The Art of Bending at
http://www.concentric.net/~Porth/strippit/artnr.shtml
http://www.concentric.net/~Porth/strippit/artnr.shtml
For a simple home-made bending jig, try http://www.flash.net/~dwwilson/ntba/archive/bjg/
And to Harbor Freight Tools - Home Page
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=35150 for details on the bender that I use the most.
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=35150 for details on the bender that I use the most.
Welding
Lay both quillons and their pas d'ane U's on a firebrick. Each will look like a lower-case letter "h," arranged bottom to bottom with each other. Be sure that they're in exactly the right position. There should be a 1/4" space between the ends of the quillons and a 3/4" space between the ends of the pas d'ane U's. This space
must fit the blade tang very closely. See 'Sketch2' again.
must fit the blade tang very closely. See 'Sketch2' again.
It helps a lot to have a positioning pattern
for aligning them. I traced three inches of the tang and the first 2 inches of the blade onto a piece of flat steel 1" wide, 1/4" thick and 5" or 6" long. The thickness of this piece is important for making the blade openings the proper sizes. It doesn't need to be as long as the entire blade tang. Only the largest 3" of tang is important for this purpose. Again, this is shown in 'Sketch2'.
for aligning them. I traced three inches of the tang and the first 2 inches of the blade onto a piece of flat steel 1" wide, 1/4" thick and 5" or 6" long. The thickness of this piece is important for making the blade openings the proper sizes. It doesn't need to be as long as the entire blade tang. Only the largest 3" of tang is important for this purpose. Again, this is shown in 'Sketch2'.
Warning! If the blade won't fit now, it probably never will.
Keep everything lined up straight while you weld. It's embarrassing to have the hilt canted at an angle to the blade!
Lay a 1" piece of 1/4" square stock across the opening between the ends of the quillons, and a 1-1/2" piece across the ends of the pas d'ane U's. Carefully center the square stock over the openings. The little pieces will be resting on the dummy tang which is between the quillons and U's.
It's convenient to have two fire bricks and lay the knuckle guard in place now, too. Weld it on when you weld the quillon block sides onto the quillons.
Weld each pair
together. Weld the knuckle guard
in place now, too. Be sure to weld it to the proper quillon if you're using bent ones! The quillon should curve toward
the knuckle guard. Check before welding. Even with a power hack saw it's not a productive use of your time to cut the knuckle guard off the wrong quillon and then weld it onto the correct one. Another good reason for starting with straight quillons for the first hilt. Turn the assembly over and weld the other two square stock pieces onto the other side. Be careful not to weld the jig into the opening! You can just tack weld the parts and then remove the jig before finishing the welds. Then clean up the welds with the belt grinder and files.
together. Weld the knuckle guard
in place now, too. Be sure to weld it to the proper quillon if you're using bent ones! The quillon should curve toward
the knuckle guard. Check before welding. Even with a power hack saw it's not a productive use of your time to cut the knuckle guard off the wrong quillon and then weld it onto the correct one. Another good reason for starting with straight quillons for the first hilt. Turn the assembly over and weld the other two square stock pieces onto the other side. Be careful not to weld the jig into the opening! You can just tack weld the parts and then remove the jig before finishing the welds. Then clean up the welds with the belt grinder and files.
The neater and more even you make the welds, the less work there is to do filing them all smooth. And it is really a lot of work! Most of the labor time in making the hilt is smoothing the welds. This is a warning. Get plenty of practice and work very carefully.
For round-stock quillon block and blade tang stops:
Next we’ll weld on the round 1" quillon block pieces and the round 1-1/2" blade tang stop
pieces. Now you need a clamping or positioning jig, like my vise-grip on a pivoting arm. Hold the already welded assembly vertically with the knuckle bow up in the air and the un-welded side of the pas d'ane U's resting on the fire brick. Put the 1-1/2" pieces of 1/4" rod next to and bridging the ends of the pas d'ane U's. This forms the rectangular opening for the blade tang to pass through and rest against. It must end up exactly the right size, so don't get too much weld filler inside but don't leave it too big, either. I always have to file this opening to fit the tang, but the less filing it takes the better I like it.
pieces. Now you need a clamping or positioning jig, like my vise-grip on a pivoting arm. Hold the already welded assembly vertically with the knuckle bow up in the air and the un-welded side of the pas d'ane U's resting on the fire brick. Put the 1-1/2" pieces of 1/4" rod next to and bridging the ends of the pas d'ane U's. This forms the rectangular opening for the blade tang to pass through and rest against. It must end up exactly the right size, so don't get too much weld filler inside but don't leave it too big, either. I always have to file this opening to fit the tang, but the less filing it takes the better I like it.
Turn the welded assembly over so that the knuckle guard side of the quillons rests on the fire brick. It will have to hang over the edge of the welding table to let the knuckle guard clear the table and brick. Lay a 1" piece of 1/4" rod across the space between quillons and weld it on. Then put the other 1" piece in position and weld it, too.
For either square or round-stock quillon block and blade tang stops: continuing the job.
Cut an opening in the smaller ring
so that the ends will just fit the ends of the blade tang stops on the pas d'anes and the larger ring ends fit across the quillon block ends. Grind the ends of the rings to about half their original thickness. The thinning of the larger ring should be with the ring tilted to about 45 degrees.
Check 'Sketch2'again, looking at the right hand side, where the tilted ring is marked from both front and top views. Flatten
the side of the ring that will rest against the quillon or pas d'ane. Weld on the rings. Carefully.
so that the ends will just fit the ends of the blade tang stops on the pas d'anes and the larger ring ends fit across the quillon block ends. Grind the ends of the rings to about half their original thickness. The thinning of the larger ring should be with the ring tilted to about 45 degrees.
Check 'Sketch2'again, looking at the right hand side, where the tilted ring is marked from both front and top views. Flatten
the side of the ring that will rest against the quillon or pas d'ane. Weld on the rings. Carefully.
And now for a little bad news . . .
I don't know how to describe making the guards for the 'offhand' or smaller side of the guard. It takes some difficult, compound bending to make a pretty one. Hopefully you'll have learned enough from making the larger side to be able to handle this part. Again study Plate 5 and Plate 6. And I hope that the various pictures (Plates) give enough graphical information to be able to make this side of the guard. If not, don't despair. Quite a few rapiers I've seen pictured had only the quillons and one side ring, with no other guard at all. The one at the upper right in Plate 9 for example. Maybe this first one should be that simple. Think about it.
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)