Talk:Myrtenaster/@comment-96.8.204.173-20150719053619/@comment-26782029-20150721080132

Back to the subject of European warfare.

You are most certainly correct about the use of the pike and shot formation which was most certainly in used during the renaisance and surrounding periods however, this only strengthens my argument towards the use of broadswords rather than rapiers if these soldiers knew they could be put in such formations then they would want their secondary weapon to be shorter and good at cutting in case they got into a packed melee.

Next I must address that by the 1800s sword and shield in all it's forms were no longer a part of european warfare that had stopped over a century beforehand even during the renaisance most usage of shields came in the form of sword and buckler. Which by the time of Shakespeare was really only used in military circumsantces it had really gone out of fashion for civilian use and had been replaced by the rapier.

On the case of side arms for musketeers the bardiche was most definanantly used by eastern Europeans and especially the Russians. On the use of rapiers as a sidearm for musketeers I must say I looked for historical images and could seem to see some blades that looked like rapiers I'm certain some musketeers used them I'm just contesting how widespread their use was in addition to rapiers I also found many a sabre and broadsword too (I also found an annoying large number of pictures that had most of the blade obscured which left it only really showing the hilt and the very tip of the blade).

Your comment about armour is mostly correct a part most people forget is that when guns were first introduced armour just got heavier to compensate, then guns got more powerful so armour got heavier again this repeated for most of the 16th and 17th centuries. It still wasn't uncommon to see heavy infantry and cavalry in full plate armour during the Thirty Years War 1608-1648 and English Civil War 1642-1651, and if you were a infantryman of any kind during either of these wars you woiuld have worn as much armour as you could get your hands on. The dramatic drop you're talking about happened towards the later part of the 17th century when guns got to the point where they were so powerful the armour required to stop bullets just became too heavy to move in properly, some cavalrymen still chose to use armour well into the napolenic wars as it was still very useful in a sword melee.

the first parts of armour to go were indeed the legs and arms the later of which being a primary target in every fencing manual that still exists however I must ask how do you consider the armpits a valid target especially with a rapier? The only way I could see you striking the opponent in the armpit is if you were to close distance with a shorter weapon and stab him with that, regardless stabbing to the armpits is impractical with any sword and I cannot think of any manual that lists that as a target.

I too am enjoying this argument thoroughly it's nice to know there are still sensible people on the internet you can have a  proper discussion with.