Swordbreakers: A Myth ?

Jim McDougall · 8th May 2009, 09:04 PM

This thread truly does continue to get gooder and gooder !

thanks to such fantastic participation from all you here!!

It is especially exciting to have the expertise of Maestro Paul MacDonald, whose eloquent explanations of the dynamics involved in actual sword combat and that perspective in the use of these intriguing anomalies.

Great input Vandoo, and well placed observations, especially on the parrying elements on these two handers!

Gav, absolutely outstanding thoughts on the application of the term "sword breaker', I had not thought of that possibility. It is often challenging to try to understand a term colloquially applied to a weapon in the parlance of the time and referring to its actual purpose.
I think a similar case for example would be the small Scottish dagger traditionally worn in the Highlanders stocking...the 'skean dubh'. The term 'dubh' (Gaelic =black, dark) has long been thought to suggest the darkened wood often seen in the hilts, and that were typically 'black'. Actually the term 'dubh' can also, from what I understand mean dark = unknown, or hidden or concealed. Apparantly this comes from these 'hideout' weapons being hidden from view. The Highlander, typically heavily armed, would relinquish his armoury in a visit to avoid personal affront, but always maintained 'backup' just in case!

I discovered some of this with the origins of my own name, McDougall.
Apparantly in Gaelic, MacDhubghaill, = son of the 'dark' foreigner. Since the ancient ancestry is Norse, these ancestors were hardly likely to be 'dark', however, in those early times, it was certainly unclear often, exactly where they from. Holding true to my ancestry, some question what planet I am from !

It certainly does make sense that the main gauche would be intended to 'break' (impede) the attack of the other blade, and these elaborately featured daggers would not only be psychologically disturbing to an opponent , but would have good potential to 'hold' the blade.
Excellent perspective very much worthy of serious consideration and further research, possibly more evidence in contemporary material.

Sa'ar, its great to have you with us, and its great to have your observations from a fencers perspective, as I know you are very much involved in that pursuit, and very much in the historical perspective.

Cornelis, outstanding empirical approach, and thank you so much ....but please be careful with those magnificent pieces! Excellent illustrations that truly add to the effects of actual implementation, and well placed remarks to add to consideration as we evaluate the possibilities here.

This truly is becoming MYTHBUSTERS in weaponry!!!

Thank you gentlemen, so very much!!

Jim

fearn · 9th May 2009, 02:08 AM

Hi Jim,

This is better than Mythbusters, because we've already got results. That might be sour grapes from pitching some weapons myths on their board a few years ago, but still it's fun to see people trying swordbreakers out and seeing what came of it.

Couple more thoughts. I think there might be a reason why they're called swordbreakers rather than, say, swordtrappers. If I was in a duel with you, and I had this weird gizmo called a "swordbreaker" in my off hand, you'd think, "right, amateur, that'll never break a sword." Then I'd trap your blade with it and skewer you. If I had a "swordtrapper" in my offhand, you'd take one look at it and be extra careful. Sometimes a misleading name is useful.

While I'm not sure how common swordbreakers are vs. main gauche blades, if they're less common, I'd guess it was because they're only useful if you've got a blade in your main hand. A main gauche is still a dagger, after all.

Great thread!

F

celtan · 9th May 2009, 01:17 PM

Some interesting main gauche pictures I have collected from the net in the last years. The serrated borders and decorations in many make me believe they were designed to prevent the opponent's blade from sliding away while pushing them out of the way for the riposte
OTOH, I still can't figure out the reason for so many holes and even ricasso-wells in some of them. To lighten the blade, or insert poison perhaps?
Please note that the Artileria Blade is a 19th C Victorian remake made in Toledo from the original.
Manuel Luis

Paul Macdonald · 9th May 2009, 02:05 PM

The oval recess in the ricasso as pictured above is for the thumb to fit in.

The grip is held with four fingers wrapped around and the thumb sits over the rear of the crossguard to sit on the ricasso face. Many original main gauches have this thumb recess to accomodate this grip.

celtan · 9th May 2009, 10:43 PM

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the explanation, I suspected as much. And yet, the small size of the well doesn't seem able to properly fit a thumb.

OTOH, our ancestor were smaller...

Best

M

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Macdonald

The oval recess in the ricasso as pictured above is for the thumb to fit in.

The grip is held with four fingers wrapped around and the thumb sits over the rear of the crossguard to sit on the ricasso face. Many original main gauches have this thumb recess to accomodate this grip.

Gonzalo G · 10th May 2009, 06:33 AM

Briefly, let see some facts:

1. The term is not used in spanish for any weapon. It seems a popular name used in other countries.
2. The main gauche have several names in spanish, but none is equivalent to ´swordbreaker´
3. The main gauche is used in the rapier fencing, and not with other kind of swords. It is mainly a civilian weapon, but not exclusively. We can differenciate very clearly the main gauche used in rapier fencing from other kind of weapons showed here.
4. The main gauche used in rapier fencing does not pretend to breake a sword blade, but only catch it or stop it, as it has been said before. Eventually, it is used to attack or to finish a wounded enemy.
5. I agree with kisak. The blades used in swords from this period have not the hardness as to break them. They are more easily bended.
6. The spanish rapier was generally made with a core of iron, with an outer envelope of steel. At least in Toledo. I don´t believe this rapiers are easily broken.
7. The rompepuntas (point breaker) has that popular name in their time (and not from a romantic writter), though its purpose was to deviate the point of the opponent´s sword from the hand, as it is a difficult maneuvre to catch the point of a sword with it and breake it. Neverthless, the point of a rapier is more fragile due its slenderness and the fact that it has not the iron core the rest of the blade has.
8. The chinese used to defend from a sword mainly with the use of a shield, and only the martial arts schools developed other defensive weapons, more or less experimental.
9. I also don´t believe that a nihonto could be broken with this kind of weapon, for the same reasons that in the case of the rapier. The soft core and the selected quenching, the multi laminated layers and the thickness of the blade, makes it very difficult.
10. I agree: the term is probably given from popular use, and is more a myth than other.
Regards

Gonzalo

Jeff D · 11th May 2009, 12:47 AM

Hi Jim,

I posted this question on this forum where they are more interested in the martial arts aspect of swords. http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/phpBB2...=215693#215693 . I think they have it right, that the term break in the sword fighting treatises means to tie up, slow down or 'render useless' , ie: these are sword brake(r)s rather then sword breakers.

All the best
Jeff

9th May 2009, 01:17 PM	#3
celtan Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PR, USA Posts: 679	Some interesting main gauche pictures I have collected from the net in the last years. The serrated borders and decorations in many make me believe they were designed to prevent the opponent's blade from sliding away while pushing them out of the way for the riposte OTOH, I still can't figure out the reason for so many holes and even ricasso-wells in some of them. To lighten the blade, or insert poison perhaps? Please note that the Artileria Blade is a 19th C Victorian remake made in Toledo from the original. Manuel Luis Attached Images Last edited by celtan; 9th May 2009 at 01:28 PM.

8th May 2009, 09:04 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,457	This thread truly does continue to get gooder and gooder ! thanks to such fantastic participation from all you here!! It is especially exciting to have the expertise of Maestro Paul MacDonald, whose eloquent explanations of the dynamics involved in actual sword combat and that perspective in the use of these intriguing anomalies. Great input Vandoo, and well placed observations, especially on the parrying elements on these two handers! Gav, absolutely outstanding thoughts on the application of the term "sword breaker', I had not thought of that possibility. It is often challenging to try to understand a term colloquially applied to a weapon in the parlance of the time and referring to its actual purpose. I think a similar case for example would be the small Scottish dagger traditionally worn in the Highlanders stocking...the 'skean dubh'. The term 'dubh' (Gaelic =black, dark) has long been thought to suggest the darkened wood often seen in the hilts, and that were typically 'black'. Actually the term 'dubh' can also, from what I understand mean dark = unknown, or hidden or concealed. Apparantly this comes from these 'hideout' weapons being hidden from view. The Highlander, typically heavily armed, would relinquish his armoury in a visit to avoid personal affront, but always maintained 'backup' just in case! I discovered some of this with the origins of my own name, McDougall. Apparantly in Gaelic, MacDhubghaill, = son of the 'dark' foreigner. Since the ancient ancestry is Norse, these ancestors were hardly likely to be 'dark', however, in those early times, it was certainly unclear often, exactly where they from. Holding true to my ancestry, some question what planet I am from ! It certainly does make sense that the main gauche would be intended to 'break' (impede) the attack of the other blade, and these elaborately featured daggers would not only be psychologically disturbing to an opponent , but would have good potential to 'hold' the blade. Excellent perspective very much worthy of serious consideration and further research, possibly more evidence in contemporary material. Sa'ar, its great to have you with us, and its great to have your observations from a fencers perspective, as I know you are very much involved in that pursuit, and very much in the historical perspective. Cornelis, outstanding empirical approach, and thank you so much ....but please be careful with those magnificent pieces! Excellent illustrations that truly add to the effects of actual implementation, and well placed remarks to add to consideration as we evaluate the possibilities here. This truly is becoming MYTHBUSTERS in weaponry!!! Thank you gentlemen, so very much!! Jim

9th May 2009, 02:08 AM	#2
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi Jim, This is better than Mythbusters, because we've already got results. That might be sour grapes from pitching some weapons myths on their board a few years ago, but still it's fun to see people trying swordbreakers out and seeing what came of it. Couple more thoughts. I think there might be a reason why they're called swordbreakers rather than, say, swordtrappers. If I was in a duel with you, and I had this weird gizmo called a "swordbreaker" in my off hand, you'd think, "right, amateur, that'll never break a sword." Then I'd trap your blade with it and skewer you. If I had a "swordtrapper" in my offhand, you'd take one look at it and be extra careful. Sometimes a misleading name is useful. While I'm not sure how common swordbreakers are vs. main gauche blades, if they're less common, I'd guess it was because they're only useful if you've got a blade in your main hand. A main gauche is still a dagger, after all. Great thread! F

9th May 2009, 02:05 PM	#4
Paul Macdonald Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Edinburgh, Scotland Posts: 48	The oval recess in the ricasso as pictured above is for the thumb to fit in. The grip is held with four fingers wrapped around and the thumb sits over the rear of the crossguard to sit on the ricasso face. Many original main gauches have this thumb recess to accomodate this grip.

10th May 2009, 06:33 AM	#6
Gonzalo G Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Nothern Mexico Posts: 458	Briefly, let see some facts: 1. The term is not used in spanish for any weapon. It seems a popular name used in other countries. 2. The main gauche have several names in spanish, but none is equivalent to ´swordbreaker´ 3. The main gauche is used in the rapier fencing, and not with other kind of swords. It is mainly a civilian weapon, but not exclusively. We can differenciate very clearly the main gauche used in rapier fencing from other kind of weapons showed here. 4. The main gauche used in rapier fencing does not pretend to breake a sword blade, but only catch it or stop it, as it has been said before. Eventually, it is used to attack or to finish a wounded enemy. 5. I agree with kisak. The blades used in swords from this period have not the hardness as to break them. They are more easily bended. 6. The spanish rapier was generally made with a core of iron, with an outer envelope of steel. At least in Toledo. I don´t believe this rapiers are easily broken. 7. The rompepuntas (point breaker) has that popular name in their time (and not from a romantic writter), though its purpose was to deviate the point of the opponent´s sword from the hand, as it is a difficult maneuvre to catch the point of a sword with it and breake it. Neverthless, the point of a rapier is more fragile due its slenderness and the fact that it has not the iron core the rest of the blade has. 8. The chinese used to defend from a sword mainly with the use of a shield, and only the martial arts schools developed other defensive weapons, more or less experimental. 9. I also don´t believe that a nihonto could be broken with this kind of weapon, for the same reasons that in the case of the rapier. The soft core and the selected quenching, the multi laminated layers and the thickness of the blade, makes it very difficult. 10. I agree: the term is probably given from popular use, and is more a myth than other. Regards Gonzalo

11th May 2009, 12:47 AM	#7
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Hi Jim, I posted this question on this forum where they are more interested in the martial arts aspect of swords. http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/phpBB2...=215693#215693 . I think they have it right, that the term break in the sword fighting treatises means to tie up, slow down or 'render useless' , ie: these are sword brake(r)s rather then sword breakers. All the best Jeff