Hi Jim,
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Concerning whether the 'cuphilt' was civilian or military, or both, this is addressed in degree in "The Rapier and Smallsword 1460-1820" by A.V.B.Norman, 1980, "...since the cuphilt is apparantly confined to Spain and lands under Spanish influence, that is southern Italy and the Spanish Netherlands, one must search in portraits of civilians from these areas, particularly in court dress. As far as I am aware, it is never illustrated in military dress in the 17th century". (pp.175-76).
|
I must agree with Fernando. This was a case of Norman not choosing his words carefully enough - Perhaps he should have said something like "the widespread use of the CH in Spanish influenced...". In fact, the cup hilt found its way to many parts of Europe that was not under Spanish influence, England for one. Swordplay was in a constant state of evolution and the CH addressed the emergent need for a more comprehensive protection of the hand in response to the ever `tighter' style of fencing. All I can say is that his otherwise excellent work must be read in conjunction with works like that of Castle to get around such minor slip-ups.
Additionally, looking at portraits is only a hint, because unless the scabbard is very narrow, we can't say what kind of blade the hilt is attached to. In other words, a cup, or any other complex hilt, a rapier does not make.
Cheers
Chris