 |
No items matching your keywords were found.
Did the French Musketeers actually carry rapiers on the battlefield, or a more military-oriented sword?
I mean, sure, they always show them with rapiers in the movies, but is that an accurate depiction? Especially considering that some of them functioned as horse-mounted troops? (Using a rapier from horseback is a very difficult thing to picture.)
I've seen some suggestion that they would have more likely carried something like a side-sword or walloon sword into battle. But if that is the case, did they carry the rapier when off the battlefield in a civilian setting? And if so, was it later replaced by the smallsword?
Or did firearms dominate the battlefield to the point that they went ahead and carried rapiers anyway, knowing that they weren't going to actually use them? (Worn for style/status rather than function?)
Sorry for the huge list of questions, but any info on what they carried and when, or sources on historical musketeer equipment and uniforms would be much appreciated.
I have to disagree. Musketeers were not heavy cavalry. In the traditional sense a musketeer = infantryman carrying a musket.
In terms of the French musketeers they may have fought on horseback, but it was certainly not as heavy cavalry. If anything they would have acted as light cavalry. Heavy cavalry being usually defined as those cavalry units relying on weight of force to penetrate the enemy formations. Using large powerful horses, equipped with armour and lances.
Light cavalry being those troops who exploit gaps in the enemy lines as well as exploiting lines of retreat and secure their own lines of communication. These troops would be armed with pistols, but their primary weapon would be a sabre.
A rapier on horseback would have served little actual purpose, as its a stabbing sword and not a slashing sword.
The French term for musketeer is actually quite obsurd, because in reality a soldier could not fire a musket from horseback with any accuracy, and would have extreme difficulties reloading. Dragoons as they became to be known (light cavalry, using both sword and pistol) in reality still served a better purpose using their sword and not their pistol. As it was a cavalry's role to apply shock and speed to the battlefield not be used as mounted infantry. Gustavus Adolphus knew this, and his principles were followed for hundreds of years.
The traditional musketeer would not have been armed with a sword. It may be suggested by prints that muskeeters were armed with both musket and sword, but its highly doubtful they had a secondary weapon. Not only would a secondary weapon mean additional weight, but swords were not cheap, and most musketeers were poor. Furthermore, the musket was actually a quite useful club. Perhaps more useful as a club than as a musket. Many learning manuals around the 16th Century show muskeeters how to swing a musket as a club, to defend one self. Furthermore with the introduction of the bayonet it became unnesseccary for them to need a secondary weapon. In actual fact, they rarely needed a second weapon in any case, because infantry armed with pikes were supposed to offer them protection from enemy cavalry.
