Wouldn't this be a fairly kickass combination? You get both the reach of a rapier and the cutting power of a wider sword. The cut-&-thrust sword would also be better at parrying heavier blades than a dagger. The ideal length might be around wakizashi/gladius length to make it better at close range. Strangely I have never heard of this combination, even though two rapiers was sometimes used despite seeming obviously inferior.
(A bit of a tangent, but I wish there were a single word meaning "one-handed cut-&-thrust sword")
>>29941734
You are gay and you watch too many cartoons
>>29941734
No because usually, even when you are using two similar weapons, say two sideswords or two rapiers, one is used for defense (usually the one in the non-primary hand) and the other for offense. You wouldn't use both for attack, so for starters you need to know if you want a primary weapon to be a thrust oriented blade or a cut&thrust one and then you chose the pairing accordingly.
Buckler were popular with cut&thrust swords because they are better at defending cuts, while daggers with rapiers because they are betters at defending thrusts.
Having a heavy weapon as a defensive tool is bad because obviously you'll defend slower and for a shorter time (heavy compaired to a dagger / buckler I mean).
Having two weapons for offense but a less perfect defense while having two unequal offensive weapons is useless, basically you have a redundant offense but also one weapon that is inferior to the other in terms of reach and offending capability, might as well have a dagger that will protect you in the shortest range (ie the one where you can't use your sword), while being good at parrying.
Two rapiers are good because their range is the same and their offensive potential is the same, so the enemy never knows from where the attack is going to be, whereas with two specialized swords he knows much more what to expect, you won't cut at thrusting range and you won't thrust if caught too short, so he can act accordingly. It doesn't do anything rapier&dagger can't do, but it's heavier, slower in the parries, more cumbersome, awkward to travel with, etc...
Also it's already not that easy to use two swords that have the same purpose, using two dissimilar swords in equal parts would too hard to bother.
Dual wielding is useless in war, mainly done for show and demonstration of skill. Choosing two swords makes your whole defense arsenal too heavy (2,5 kg at least) while you probably won't use enough to justify the encumbrance.
>>29941734
Also if you think a swordsmanship thing would be "fairly kickass", yet nobody did it in any sort of decent numbers or even talked about it, not even the late bolognese masters who were exposed to both the use of two sideswords, single cut&thrust swords and rapiers, well it's probably because in fact, it's not that "kickass" and just plain snowflakey to be of any practical use.
People sticked to simple stuff because it worked, it's usually boring stuff, but it's easier to learn, easier to pull under stress, less prone to fumble, still as deadly, so why bother?
>>29941890
A fencer wielding two rapiers is at huge disadvantage at close range. A cut-&-thrust sword can still be used relatively easily in close range, even if it were relatively long as with cuts you don't attack with the tip.
As the off-hand weapon would be both a decent cutter and and thruster, it would be less predictable than a rapier in a sense. Cuts are also more likely to do wounds that limit the opponent's ability to fight immediately, by making limbs useless. I don't think you can simply say that they are "inferior in offending capability".
>>29941904
This precise combination isn't explicitly mentioned, but when fighting with two swords is mentioned it isn't always clear what type of swords they are.
>>29942116
>A fencer wielding two rapiers is at huge disadvantage at close range.
If you ever get there, considering said fencer has two weapons with which he can keep you at bay. Also the shortest range I was talking about is basically wrestling range, at such close range, if you attempt to move your sword arm, you can be grappled, so the efficiency of a sword is greatly reduced whereas a dagger is at home.
And in fact if you're facing someone with a rapier and a dagger with a rapier and a cutting sword, it would be predictable as the r&d person only has to keep you at bay and make you use your cutting sword to parry (slowly), he doesn't have to bother about the offensive capability of it since he can parry and outrange you with his rapier (which would be on the same side assuming the two persons are same-handed) and force you to offend only with your own rapier.
It would be inferior not in terms of wounding but range, a rapier is inferior to a spear because it can never strike without being out of range, same thing with the cutting sword against the rapier. The thrust is always striking further away than the cut, plus you mention it would be a short cutting sword which accentuate this. You offend with the longest range, with the most efficient attack, that will wound the most and that is with a thrust. If you have a weapon that will offend from a closer range, if you do close the range to offend with it, it makes your long rapier useless because you're too close. So in fact, you restrict your options because you can only use one weapon at a time, in which case going with a cutting sword and a buckler or a rapier and a dagger achieve the same results with less encumbrance, better handling, better parrying speed and recovery and is less awkward at carrying every day.
When fighting with two swords is mentioned, it's assumed it's with the sword that was already introduced, so usually a sidesword (spada da filo, spada da lato), otherwise it would have been cleared.
Using two rapiers (called a case of rapiers) was amog the 5 most prominent rapier styles, along with buckler, dagger, cloak, and I don't remember the last one.
>>29942781
just a rapier?
>>29942781
rapier and rotella (capo ferro had something on it, don't know if more talked about it) ?
>>29941876
bit harsh bro... just because OP isn't a landwhale mcdonalds binge-eating faggot like yourself that makes his whole life about 'muh guns' because you can't be /fit/ and talk about 'muh gains', doesn't make the OP gay. Swords are an elegant weapon, I often wish we could carry around swords in this day and age. I carry a knife every day and I understand this is the closest I will come to the days of yore when sword carry was possible, but you are an insecure autist. Please leave this thread.
OP, great thread, it's a shame fags like this ruin it.
>>29942986
>implying you aren't OP
So how would "muh guns" explain how OP has less knowledge of the subject
>muh elegance
>>29942735
>If you have a weapon that will offend from a closer range, if you do close the range to offend with it, it makes your long rapier useless because you're too close.
There's still a middle ground range where you can use both weapons effectively. How large depends on the exact length of the cut-&-thrust sword. The length was just a suggestion - I'm not sure what would be the ideal length exactly.
You make it seem like the greater weight compared to dagger is an enormous disadvantage. Well yeah, you can move dagger around faster. But so you can move smallsword faster than a backsword, doesn't mean it's superior. In addition to the inferior cutting ability, the dagger isn't also as good at blocking cuts of heavier swords.
>>29943356
>There's still a middle ground range where you can use both weapons effectively. I'm not sure what would be the ideal [sword] length exactly.
True, I'm certainly being overly dismissive, but then having a gladius/kodachi as a second sword is really not the same as having say a broadsword/tachi !
When I was talking about the dagger, it was only on the use of parrying, in which case a lighter, faster weapon is indeed more advantageous against thrusts, against cuts, you could simply swap the dagger for a buckler and be good with it, since it's still lighter and faster to operate than a sword. Hell you could even triple wield ! A sword in one hand, a buckler and a dagger in another ! It would be historical plus it would still be lighter than a second sword, or similar weight at least...
Also I'm a terrible sucker for smallswords so you won't have me admit it's inferior to backsword, but that's another debate.
>>29943356
>>29943562
To go further, according to what I've been taught at least, there is four ranges, that are determined of course by the length of the weapons's length and the stature of the fighters. So there is from shortest to largest, wrestling measure where you can freely grab with an off hand but swinging a sword is dangerous and cumbersome, short/killing measure where both opponents can strike without moving their feet, long/combat measure where both fighters needs to do one and only one step to strike so that they can step and strike in a single motion and then farthest/out of measure where you need at least two step in order to be able to strike, so that no fighters is there immediately threatened in any way.
What I was talking about with swords being too long and daggers being at home was of course the shortest, grappling measure.
>>29943562
Smallswords a shit.
Let me clarify is that I don't necessarily think this pair of weapons is some holy grail of civilian self-defence. I just think it' a cool and viable combination, with advantages along with disadvantages compared to other options. I'm certainly not surprised that rapier/cutting-sword + dagger/bugger was more common as they were very good as well in addition to being lighter and not as expensive.
>>29943981
Thank you kind sir ! You are truly a gentleman and a scholar.
>>29941734
It has been done just like that
"Florentines Doing “Florentine”
Combat with Two Swords According to Francesco di
Sandro Altoni (c.1540) and Marco Docciolini (1601)
The "duel of the century" between Ascanio della Corgna and Giovanni Taddei in 1546, conducted
with full and half-length swords and an armoured forearm."
http://hroarr.com/florentines-doing-florentine-combat-with-two-swords-according-to-altoni-and-docciolini/
>>29944458
Cool, I have seen that but I didn't pay attention to the swords.
