Matt, I'm curious. I've been looking at some German basket-hilted swords, and I'm noticing a consistent trend of having a thumb ring incorporated just belong the "side-ring" portion of the hilt, where your thumb would conveniently hook in when gripping the sword. Do you think that the disadvantages of the finger-ring would carry over to such a thumb ring, or would you say the thumb is less likely to get caught/easier to extract, being a shorter digit?
If the use of the finger on the ricasso gave this grip an advantage to thrusting AND cutting but fell away because the swords were so light it was no longer necessary, I am curious as to why this technique never returned later into the 19th century when there was a variety of thrusting and cutting swords which all seemed to use the french, or "sabre" grip, or the hammer grip which were heavier, military swords which could benefit from the added control.
Matt T The finger-ring did return in the form of a leather finger-loop on some German, Austrian and Swiss sabres. However, placing the thumb up the back of the grip achieves a similar goal as the finger-ring and 19th century sabres were generally lighter than rapiers.
+scholagladiatoria very good analysis, but I have to point out that Italian smallswords and sabres never let go of finger rings (for the sabre were often but not always made of leather rather than metal). in Turin Royal Armory (here the link to long blades section www.artito.arti.beniculturali.it:81/Armeria%20Reale/2eventi/LAYOUT/eventi.asp?Sezione=0 , choose Collezioni: Le Armi, and jump to section G in the list on top of page, that is the one for long blades: every piece has its description - Italian only - and a picture) there's many examples either of smallsword and sabres (Italians) with very comfortable and useful finger rings, when French smallswords already had abandoned it for reasons unknown to normal people. in my fencing practice I always found finger rings not only useful, but fundamental, for a better grip with less effort, a greater precision and less weight on the wrist, better control on the tip, and I can't see a single logical reason for not using them. also because without finger rings you don't have a ricasso, and without ricasso you don't have the "sentimento del ferro" you can't easily feel the steel as you should do in order to understand the opponent blade's intentions.... about the hand protection rings, it is all in the position of the hand: with a basket hilt one is forced to keep the hand low, with the tip upward in order to menace the throat of the opponent. this is the only way to keep the hand safe (and a thrust between the bars is really easy to take if only the other has the opportunity to place it, believe me it's neither rare nor difficult to place), but has the double disadvantage of forcing a closer misura with the other, and to make the blade travel a longer way to its final destination on the body of the opponent, reducing the speed of the thrust. with a cup or double shell hilt, one can fence keeping his hand completely extended, with the tip of the sword aligned with the arm (blade quite horizontal), shorter way to travel and safer distance of the body from the other.... in the first case one will use more sidesword techniques, in the other the true rapier style will have its perfect efficacy. about the grip: I usually pass one finger over the quillions when I handle a sidesword (firmer grip and easier cuts), while with the striscia (cup hilt rapier) I pass two fingers inside the ring, using the middle finger to move the tip on the horizontal plane, and the index (kept against the inner side of the cup) for disengagement and circular tip movements. of course, the thumb controls the blade's vertical movements. thank you for the videos, always very interesting and accurate.
@@baronlitron Thanks for the comment! I'm currently designing a custom sword and I also can't see any considerable drawback to the finger ring. Especially compared to the "thumb up" method which is simply not as secure a grip. The danger of being physically disarmed seems like far less of a sacrifice for far greater an advantage. Has anything been brought to your attention to the contrary in the past 6 years?
@@JainaSoloB312 no, I have not found other or better grips either for sabre or sword: I don't know what kind of sword you are designing, but for any kind of sword other than medieval cros shaped swords (from XV century's sidesword all down to the Greco ground sword of the beginning of XX century) the most important thing is to maintain a ricasso, that is a 4-8 cm long portion of the blade, thick and not honed, between the quillinos and the protection cup/cage/double shell from which the actual blade begins. even for smallswords it is essential for the tip control and an effortless, firm grip on the handle, if you search the web for Italian style smallsworda you can easily see that ricasso and quillinons are maintaned in every model up to the XX century. for the sabre (which has no ricasso for its design, a leather ring inserted where the blade passes through the hilt gives you a better grip, and a a better elasticity and strenght on the mulinelli, since you can turn the whole sabre around your index tip in a smooth and fast way. best wishes for your sword
I was searching more information on this fingering thing on the interweb and I got completely different kind of videos. Then I read the description or this video and I found out that it said "finger-rings". Well, my bad, I guess.
I've seen transitional small swords with vestigial finger rings which would be awkward or even impossible to put your finger through. I've wondered why it never went to a spur, like a sub-hilt on a bowie knife. That would seem to me to offer all of the advantages with none of the disadvantages. Thoughts on this, or perhaps links to examples of swords that actually had this feature?
I've seen a lot of smallswords with little rings behind the guard, as in this example: i.imgur.com/GQROTpH.jpg I've heard them described as 'vestigial finger-rings', and I'm wondering if these were purely decorative, were ever actually used with the finger, or were functional in some other way?
I guess curved hilts are another solution for this? Or are there other reasons again for that? So, swords with none of this stuff and a great big pommel on the end of the hilt, what are you supposed to do there? Hold it at an angle to stop the pommel bumping your forearm? Put the pommel beside your forearm?
I always wondered when the curved "French grip" as modern fencers now know it came about. When I tried to do some research to answer that question myself a few years back, I only ever found purely straight, orthodox grips on smallswords--like the one on your spadroon in the video. Was that more of a Victorian/Edwardian-era foil thing?
+Andrew “Ian” MacDougall Yes, I don't know precisely, but it developed only on the sporting foil and some time in the later 19th century. In the earlier 19th century the grips were still straight on foils. The epee was a mid-19th century invention (from the French epee de combat), but the early ones of those also have straight grips - I don't think they got wavy grips until the end of the 19th century.
What are your thoughts on thumb rings on Polish Sabres? To be they look like thumb removers, especially if you are using the sabre while mounted and moving
The thumb is shorter and more "slippery", it is harder to hold on to it, therefore les likely for that to happen. Also, those thumb rings are actually quite large, smooth and not a perfect ring, it should be flat on the side next to the handle. Altough very good to get a very strong "locked" hammer grip by squising with the thumb, it is actually primarilly for the exact same reason as the (index)finger ring, more leverage for snappier cuts, especialy false edge cuts
looking at your small sword , it is edged all the way to the hilt? sorry a sword Noob here, I thought the small sword were a thrust weapon due to blade design and not edged past the first inch or two.
Having the thumb up the back seems counter-intuitive to me, it looks like it loosens your grip and, if the sword is stopped suddenly, for example, your thrust hits something hard, it kind of looks like you're at risk of injuring, maybe even breaking, your thumb, or is that just not an issue? O.o
It makes sense about the dangers of the finger ring when being disarmed as it can happen today when someone unarmed is disarming someone armed. Martial arts such as krav maga involve the attacked grabbing the gun and twisting it about to point the muzzle away from them and to hopefully break the trigger finger of the attacker. Although in the case of a trigger guard its job is to prevent the trigger from being bumped and firing the gun rather than keeping the gun oriented like a finger ring would.
Fencing! 😃🤺 Don’t you think it be SOOO COOOL if rapier could be a fourth fencing weapon?! 😃 It’ll be a combination of épée and sabre. You can use all the moves in épée and sabre, the whole body’s target area, no right of way and you ARE allowed to put your back foot in front of your front foot! Oh yeah! Make the box think you and your opponent are fencing épée!
Is it just my imagination, or do people use the same grip for smallswords as they use for tennis rackets? I've never actually held a smallsword (I've only had rapiers, long swords, and one claymore), but I did play tennis for a few years, and the grip they taught in tennis seems to be basically the same as what he showed in the video just now.
the spanish held on (no pun intended) to the rapier for much longer than their western continentals - i think it is because they trained early whereas a sabre can be banged off an assembly line much faster to make
The spadroon you holding may have been designed to be held like a sabre, but certainly i won't use a smallsword like that, with the tumb aligned with the edge (if there is an edge to the smallsword). There is zero issue releasing the rapier if being disarmed without breaking any fingers, unless u hold the rapier like a sidesword and intend to cut with it most of the time. But in such a case disarming will be very difficult. Breaking the wrist is more likely to happen.
As an addition, the ringering brings one closer to the center of gravity of the blade..even though the smaller sword does not have the fingering does not mean that you can adopt the similar grip. Disarms in small sword fencing, and rapier, does not apply as much if held in a relaxed and not a death grip.
Not too carp, but the example you are using as a smallsword doesn't really look like a smallsword. The blade looks less like a thrusting blade and a bit more like a very early spadroon. (?) Awfully wide for a smallsword blade with virtually no point, and it appears that there is some sort of ridge (weird fuller) that almost looks like a backsword blade mounted, upside down, in the hilt. Although some early smallswords, coming off off transition rapiers, had a two edged blade, the triangular hollow ground blade is much more in keeping with smallsword. The general, accepted smallsword hilt also has more prominent "donkey-hooves", even though they were not used. Regardless, always enjoy the videos.
Do you have any history on Irish weapons or fighting? I know that's a pretty broad topic but I can't find much of anything other than Shilleleagh and ancient Celtic fighting.
Hey matt, why does the rapier have that type of fancy hilt? Since a rapier usually faces another thrusting weapon won't the opponents thrust simply go through those holes and hit your hand?
+Ravi Tharaka Wijesekara A rapier might not always face another thrusting weapon. They were common self-defense weapons, and in that scenario your opponent's weapon cannot be predicted. The rapier is also capable of delivering shallow cuts to disable or wound the opponent before a fatal thrust. The rings on the rapier are adequate to protect against slashes to the hand. As for thrusts, it is possible for the blade to go between the rings and strike the hand. Later weapons had full cup or shell hilts, which offered more hand protection in exchange for more weight. However even with a ring hilt hits to the hand wouldn't have been very common. The gap between the rings is narrow, and your sword can get stuck between the rings. A slash or stab to the forearm was a much more common technique.
Any idea what the ideal grip length is? Allowing for diff size of hand? I made a wooden (poplar) grip for my Hanwei rapier and made it a fraction of an inch and much thicker that the original and it seems to improve handling but am curious what historically were the dimensions most used?
My opinion, and i am by no means an expert is that the reason the finger ring fell out of favor is speed. With the rapier the finger ring is used to hold the blade up (not point down as would happen on such a long blade) . The whole arm is involved in holding the rapier. On the smallsword the grip is such that you use mainly the triceps on the thrust,or you should anyway, fewer muscles grater speed less tiring, more practical considering the clothes they wore at the time.
Would you be down to do something about handshake grip/ foil grip on knives or daggers and in the thrust in general, in regard to hitting bone. Something I've come across is that the hammer grip is the strongest grip, because your thumb wraps it. On the other hand, sometimes having the point forward allows the palm to reinforce the thrust.
Thanks for the video! I was just wondering, since you're addressing the topic of small swords: Would spadroons be gripped in a similar way to the small sword, or would they, as cut and thrust weapons, be held with a more right-angled "hammer" grip, despite the very similar hilt?
Edi, from my experience the point of the thumbrings on some schiavona are similar to that of the index finger ring/loop, they increase tip control and the amount of force the user can put with ease into a cut. I'm no sword expert, but I've a little training and have handled a few schiavona. They're gorgeous weapons. It seems like the thumbrings weren't that common on rapiers though. My admittedly uneducated guess is that thumbrings aren't particularly helpful on swords specialized for thrusting. Just being able to wrap your index finger around the guard greatly increases fine control of the tip. Plus, as scholagladiatoria would point out, they're one more thing to possible get your hand broken in if the opponent grabs your blade.
They give you more control over the blade and allow you to stop swings faster by pushing down on the ring and twisting your wrist to perform quicker feints.
Interestingly the samilar ring fingering over the front quill is how to use a kitchen chefs knife and to spanish escrima with daggers. It is still a three finger grip with the last 3 digits or the first 2 digits. Disarms in eskrima is the same, but some schools do teach not to grip a sword tightly, but to rather loose the weapon in a disarm to change to the next weapon or fight on. The index fingering gives a cut like a chefs knife.
I've always had two questions about the rapier/sides word hilt: Why was the cross guard behind the finger rings, wouldn't that make it more awkward to use it to parry? Or just overall, why were there fingerrings, since later swords don't use them? Couldn't you just extend the hilt and hold it like you would with finger rings? Also, why would the swept hilt never protect the top of the finger rings? We're they not concerned about the blade of the rapier sliding through to the hands?
It's about weight distribution. Earlier rapiers were approximately 44" (111.76cm) long. With that the balance would be more towards the tip. Since rapiers favored thrusts over slashing, you'd want the weight distributed more towards the handle. Later, sabers became more the standard at 33" (83.82cm) long and favored slashing, thus hits were down sized to "knuckle dusters" and allowed more weight in the center to tip, especially effective from horseback. In between and towards the saber's time were court/small swords which were, strictly speaking, thrusting swords. The blade design lent for more weight in the hand, the smaller hilts gave some hand weight, but also afforded a more noble design.
+taliesin garland The Hanwei practical is relatively cheap, but the tip tends to wobble due to too much flexibility. They are also balanced too close to the hilt for delivering cuts. I would advise saving a bit more for a better weapon. In the US Darkwood Armories make a "Destreza" training sword for around 300$ that is also good for Bolognese. Look under WMA supply. In Europe the shipping costs make Darkwood a more expensive option, so I would recommend a sidesword from Peter Regenyei instead. We get all our longswords from him.
Other thing to note about the Hanwei Practical. The flat tip tends to really hurt unless you cover it or wear a lot of gear. The problem is that traditional sword plastic tips can't fit past the flat
That would be a really poor decision. It works well for sports weapon where the goal is to touch, but if you're actually thrusting into someone wearing some level of protection, a couple things can happen: 1) Your arm will be stopped by the resistive force/the enemy will be pushed away (rarelly a problem with a blade such as a rapier). 2) the blade will bend instead of penetrating. 3) The blade will turn. The problem with a pistol design is number 3. The grip just has to slide in your hand a few degrees and you find the blade turning by several inches. Considering the resistive force of actually piercing armor, if the blade is not in line with the hilt, the hand cannot hold the blade sturdy on its axis, and you will lose your penetrative power. Moreover the difference with a gun is that your blade should point at the guy's throat while being near your hip level to provide a defensive guard, therefore it wouldn't be very advantageous.
