what prove mortall, whereas a man may receive many cutts in the Body, yea, even in the Head, with a Broad Sword, which will not be mortall, yea even hardly so disabling, as that a Man with a small sword may not (betwixt the time of his receiv∣ing his wound, and being disabled) kill his Adversary, but I assure you, if a Man be run thorow with a small-Sword, it either immediatly killeth him or disableth him so, that he can hardly keep his feet, let alone to resist any longer.Sch.Truely Sir your argument is very strong, and in my opinion, there can little be said against it, yet I have heard those in their Schools, who taught the Broad-Sword, say that they would hitt a Man oftner with the Broad Sword, or Cudgell, then a Man could hitt them with a small sword or Flourret?Ma.I shall likewise easily answer you as to that, First every Man endeavoureth to maintain the excellency of the Art he pro∣fesseth above other Arts of that nature, as much as possible, that so he may be the better imployed, and really a Man can hard∣ly be condemned for so doing, Secondly in playing with Blunts, I think the Cudgell hath as farr the advantage of the Flourret, as in sharps the small-sword, hath of the broad,0