English Swords, Fort Algernon, First Anglo Powhatan War

[@anselmdanker9519]

Very impressive 😊thank you

[@billder2655]

great video👍🏼 sending love from stroud, england 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[@wiskadjak]

That's a good demo. The single tempo defence/counter attack is a classic!. One of my go to moves in rapier fencing.

[@adjothemodest]

Thank you, sir, very-very much!

[@Verdunveteran]

sorry to have to correct you but the second sword is not a rapier, thats a replica of the famous Munich Town Guard sword, which is a military style cut-and-trust sword based on examples from the Wallace Collection in London and the Bavarian National Museum in Germany. This was a type of sword that was massproduced for common soldiers and town guards and not a gentlemans weapon. Yes, the entire hilt, with it's guard is indeed very similar to a rapier. However the the blade is much wider and cut oriented than the vast majority of rapiers. It's also a fair deal shorter. I assume your example is either the Windlass Steelcraft replica version or the the higher end replica made by Arms & Armor. A rapier on the other hand has a very similar style of hilt and guard but usually has a far more narrow and longer thrust oriented blade. But no matter what it's a beautiful sword that I hope to have in my own collection one day.

[@kristopherpeters6703]

You have a good eye. This is indeed a Windless Steelcraft "cut and thrust" or "Munich Town Guard" sword. In the early 17th century the English probably would have simply called it a "sword" or an "arming sword." I called it a rapier because it is a term that most modern viewers will be familiar with and although the blade is broader and slightly shorter than a rapier it still has the same basic form.

[@JCOwens-zq6fd]

That is a "side-sword" a type of cut & thrust sword. Not technically a rapier. Rapiers can cut some but they are much much more narrow & a bit longer. Up to around 47 inches.

[@kristopherpeters6703]

Thanks for commenting. In the early 17th century the English probably would have simply called it a "sword" or an "arming sword." I called it a rapier because it is a term that most modern viewers will be familiar with and although the blade is broader than a rapier it still has the same basic form. "Side sword" and "cut & thrust" are both modern terms used by collectors and sport fencers.

[@1989gibbi]

That is a side sword or cut-and-thrust sword. It is not a rapier. Per the definition of a rapier it is only effective at a thrust not at a cut

[@kristopherpeters6703]

Thanks for commenting. In the early 17th century the English probably would have simply called it a "sword" or an "arming sword." I called it a rapier because it is a term that most modern viewers will be familiar with and although the blade is broader than a rapier it still has the same basic form. "Side sword" and "cut & thrust" are both modern terms used by collectors and sport fencers. We have a number of Early Modern sword manuals and treatises that include cutting moves for rapiers. The important part was how the sword was gripped, not how narrow the blade was.