Yes but when you look at the video you see that the popliteal is not armored. Joints are always the most vulnerable to attacks and the injuries to the knie is not funny.
So an arrow to the knee definitely would end any sport career.
That may be true, but take a look at Musashi and his history. Honestly i dont’t know any other person that did such things, he even killed the whole Yoshika (best in Kyoto and Nihon) school in one battle.
This was a whole army (with muskets and archers) against one man, and the one man won. So never again was the ‘one man army’ better applied, than to him. He never claimed to be the best, he simply was it.
This video is really bad, this guy does not even know how to use the Longsword or the Daito. But i wanted only to point out to you how the Daito is running through the ice. This are like the Bézier splines.
All the other things are shit, and also the cutting of the ice with a Daito is nonsense, but it displays good the curve and bending that a blade makes when it goes through tissue. The Longsword is not so good cutter like the Daito, but not so bad like displayed in this video. This Freifechter does also say some things that i would not say, because they are incorrect (the curved blades), but he is right that this test was nonsense and on all counts false.
The deadliest warrior had only good moments displaying the damage done by the weapons. All other things have been simply sh… i mean bad.
Yes, but attacking the gaps in the armor joint is PRECISELY the sort of attack half-swording is designed for. You wouldn’t try to attack that location with a cut when harnischfechten because it’s a small moving target requiring a lot of precision. Even if you DO manage to hit in that area, you still have to get the gap between the plates to actually do any damage.
Which is HEAVILY mythologized and can’t be taken at face-value. It’s no different than the stories that have sprung up around gunslingers such as Holliday and Hickock.
But look at the French video @ 0:16 and 0:57 you’ll clearly see they have mail gussets on the upper leg and inside the knee. You are correct on the fact that the inside of the knee is one of the targets used when fighting a man in armor but in freeplay or something related to it you would probably not use it in fear of cutting someones artery. The Porter un coup direct is also not used in the other video for obvious reasons.
We know he existed and we know he was an extremely good swordfighter, but not everything attributed to him might be true. With larger than life figures you always have a few myths surrounding them. I don’t really think anyone can claim to be the best swordsman, as for Musashi I don’t believe he traveled to America, Europe, India or the Middle East to test his swordsmanship against other cultures ones, so making a sweeping statement is not really founded in a basis or reality.
Now if you want to continue this little mind game I would put forward these contestants:
Pier Gerlofs Donia (around 7 feet tall)
Supposedly his helmet
And Sword
Fiore dei Liberi
Guru Gobind Singh
Dupont and Founier
That is an established fact. With the laminated steel and iron combination you can make the steel edge a little harder than on the double edged European swords where such a thing would result in decreased structural integrity, another thing it has going for it is the angle of and length of the bevel (or edge) which are clearly suited better towards cutting.
Besides his travels and some accounts, which are attributed to him, he is very well documented.
But what stands out, is that no documentation states that he has ever served a lord in a battle. His participation in battles seems to be only attributed to him, without a real evidence. But his duels are a the ‘real deal’, most of the people he fought, were people in high positions and fame, in their time. He also has duelled before the Shogun.
Pier Gerlofs Donia was certainly a ‘great’ man in many aspects. But if he was so great as a sword fighter? Certainly the threat range coming from his size and the size of his sword, is frightening.
Fiore dei Liberi duells are not that good documented, but definitely he was not a loser. He lived to be, well over 80.
Guru Gobind Singh: Are you sure he was not some Kamasutra master? O.K. That was disrespectful. His cunning as a general is great, but i don’t know about his sword fighting skills.
Pierre Dupont de l’Étang is also more known as a general. François Fournier-Sarlovèze dito.
The problem is also that the polish nobles did laugh about the french fencing skills with the sabre in napoleonic times.
Musashi was only briefly a sword fencing teacher, he is only known for his own duels and only for the duels and his sword fighting skills. Nothing else. Besides that he has tried to learn other things, but he was only good in one thing: To win a duel and too kill an opponent. And yes. He did not met other fighting techniques, besides the techniques that are in Nihon. Therefore we don’t know, how he would have fared or competed against a european fencing master. But i tend to think that he would quite capable of doing it. On a higher level the different sword fighting styles tend to erase their borders and become quite similar (not the same), as long the swords share the same usage.
Even a non cutting blow would make the opponents footwork real bad. And if you cannot kill them with one strike, then take them their abilities slowly away, step by step.
In my honest opinion you would risk to much attacking the well protected knees in that video, you essentially invite the other person to strike you from above or at face level which has a far greater capacity to kill you. However I do agree the backside of the knee makes for a great target on armored opponents.
The English bill is extremely suited to this purpose.
Gang up on the Knight in shiny armor and use the bill to drag his legs from down under him.
You just claimed he was the best swordsman ever and now you state he never fought anyone outside of Japan. I do not claim he was a bad swordsman at all but you make such a sweeping statement while not providing an awful lot of convincing material.
So were Holliday and Hickock. and that sure hasn’t kept the reality from being greatly exaggerated. And we’re barely talking about over a century. If you honestly believe that the exploits of a man who died nearly 400 years ago happened exactly as they’re documented, then I’ve got a bridge to sell you…
As Yogi Berra once (actually for real) said, “I really didn’t say everything I said.”
Yeah, you don’t actually see a lot of attacks to the leg in German longsword for this reason. The angles make you too vulnerable, as all your opponent needs to do is step out at schietelhau if you’re blossfechten. It’s less of a risk in harness, but you still risk a poke through your sallet and into your face with how far you have to close to successfully attack the knee.
You wouldn’t ordinarily attack the knee unless you’re able to get around to his side and put yourself off line from a counter.
Ohh sweet little hypocrisy…
And you trust a book, from an author without any confirmed duel victories. Without any deeper knowledge about this character and his history. A man that has written his four books in shady verses and with false depictions, having certainly confirmed none engineering knowledge, but claiming it. About a school only spread in south germany, that has disappeared within 20 years after the introduction of the rapier in this lands
(with your words an ‘inferior french fighthing style’, has evaporated this ‘superb previous german fighting style of Liechtenauer’), with the last practitioner dying 66 year after that event, and this mysterious superb founder, from whom is only left a name: Lichtenauer and some Merkverse “GNM 3227a”.
Or about a guy that has written on his search after someone who can teach him the swordsmanship, and his unconfirmed 5 victories and his mysterious unconfirmed sword masters.
Or do you would more trust the written things about a man for whom we can say:
That his traditions of his fighting style is still preserved today, and tought without any interruption and several lines.
That the lists and original documented counts of his victories, services, live and whereabouts still exist,
from which we have a clear timeline and outlining his life, in a conservative culture with high literacy rate in his life time. (With cross confirming sources about him and his life.)
That the school that he has founded, has still his personal preserved notations, artwork, tools and written books.
There’s no hypocrisy at all beyond what you’re reading into it. The Yoshioka-ryu “fact” that you posted as a documented and confirmed action of Musashi isn’t so clear as you’re claiming. At best he fought and won two duels, and assassinated a third member. Nothing at all about his slaughtering the entire army single-handedly. He sure as hell didn’t destroy the Yoshioka-ryu, which continued after the event. The simple FACT is that Musashi’s exploits have been exaggerated and mythologized every bit as much as ANY historical figure elevated to the status of folk hero. It doesn’t matter a damn how much written history there is about him. Sift through the fluff and historians can tell you the actual details of Wyatt Earp’s life and career, but there’s still been a LOT of fluff (let’s start with the fact that he was just as much of a thug and killer as the men he killed. Which was the case of MANY of the lawmen of the time. In fact the difference between outlaw and lawmen was often pretty damn slim, and someone who was a lawman Monday might become an outlaw himself by Friday, not to mention vice-versa).
You’re also twisting and ignoring the point I was making about the broken tradition of the longsword to serve your own purposes here, which you’ve been doing for this entire thread. All that means is that modern scholars are trying to reconstruct it as best they can, so may be unclear about what the original masters meant with what they write. That DOES NOT INVALIDATE the writing in of itself. The Liechtenauer Merkverse and the later glosses on it IE Ringeck are no less accurate and practical just because modern scholars struggle to understand the intent and meaning. That’s an onus on the practitioners, NOT the masters. That’s the only difference between the fragmentary fechtbuchen and the “unbroken” Japanese tradition. You don’t NEED the documented “Joe Bob of Bohemia killed Billy Jean of Avignon on the 13th of February 1459 by shoving a rondel up his ass” to say that what the writers of the fechtbuchen are saying is correct and works.
Actually, I didn’t say anything about the French at all. And so you know, I wouldn’t even mind learning rapier myself some day, but it’s in NO WAY the pinnacle of Western swordsmanship as you’ve spent almost this entire thread trying to claim. Even the rapier itself gave way to other types (IE, the smallsword, from which modern sport fencing derives). One would think that if that were the “pinnacle” of Western swordsmanship than the evolution of the art would have stopped there. It was fine for what it was intended: street brawls, personal defense, and dueling. But you would NOT take it onto a battlefield (random observation: the rapier was very specialized, yet the longsword was used for all of the above: dueling, defense, and warfare).
In defense of Ser_Awesome Terry Jones is a Historian in the general sense of the word. He examines historical texts and debunked a great many medieval myths. Say what you might the Documentary on the BBC he made (Was called medieval lives) might be presented slightly lightly and funny but there is some truth in it.
Errata:
But what stands out, is that no documentation states that he has ever served a lord in a battle. His participation in battles seems to be only attributed to him, without a real evidence.
What i mean is that he states, that he has fought in 6 battles, but this is not confirmed by any document, besides his own writing. And there is a very good doubt about one battle and his participation in it. Perhaps he was a large battle con man? His adopted sons were mentioned. Or simply he did not clearly remember, the things from his youth with an age 16-17, in his older age (over 40 years after the events), and has added one battle to his list without the real participation in it.
The Yoshioka school had more then one branch, by killing the 12 year old Yoshioka in his ‘army camp’, he had ended this branch. He has dueled with the Masters of this school in 1604, and won with just 21 years, but one of the masters survived crippled. The entire Yoshioka familiy ended the sword buisness only after a battle (perhaps the battle in Osaka) around 1614, and begann a other buisness. So yes this familiy has survived and yes even a crippled master can teach sword fighting.
You don’t become a folk hero for no reason. Surely you’re deeds become exaggerated and sometimes other deeds are attributed to you. So ok this Yoshioka’s army maybe had not 90 people but 30 people.
Still one person don’t attacks 30 people, kills their ‘protected’ leader and survives it, especially only with melee weapons. You can surely write a lot about a person, but also important are the cross references and confirmations that exist on different occasions.
But i would say that is the best proofe (only a video would have been better, but this was not invented yet), if a fighter is better or not. And this very simple fundamental facts are lacking in consideration of Liechtenauer, Thallhoffer or even Fiore dei Liberi, Pier Gerlofs Donia and Guru Gobind Singh (i take only persons mentioned in this thread).
There is always a reason why something dies out or is discontinued or why it is continuous and has a living tradition.
And this schools died out even before the death of the larger swords like the Bidenhänder (only 3kg).
There is a reason, why they have been not taught anymore only 20 years after the introduction of the rapier in this region of south germany. In nature there is the principle of surviving of the fittest, and something dies only out if their food source, breeding places are taken away, or a another and better predator appears, that takes the food away or kills it off.
I do state that there are maybe more than one reason, why this fighting style has disappeared. But it did not survived on the battlefield or in duels or as a exercise. Why it has disappeared on the battlefield is very clear.
But you should ask yourself the necessary question, why it has disappeared in duels or as a exercise, or as an defense weapon.
In Nihon it is clear how things were settled, if a fighting techniques or a fighter is better, simply with a duel. The survivor was better. And if this simple principle applies to european continent, then you should think carefully and open about it. I know that this ‘Gottesurteil (Trial by ordeal, ordalium)’ was well used even in the 19th century.
I still don’t see how you can possible think them to be conmans.
The fact that the Rapier was fashionable, appeared less brutish and is better suited to civilian self defense?
Actually quite complicated but the gist is that armor use slowly declined with only cavalry and lightly armored musketeers using their swords a great deal of time.
I am willing to bet the Japanese sword tradition would also have died out if it didn’t close its borders and didn’t forbid usage of muskets and such.
How do you know that a Tennis player is better, than one other player? How do you know that someone does have the knowledge in a specific topic? You let them play against each other, or you test them. Without this test, there is no proof. But i did not state, that they were all conmen’s. Only about the Thallhoffer book is said that his techniques and inventions are not good or do not function. But i also have to add that some/most techniques in his books are good and do function very well. There is simply a discrepancy that is difficult to explain with physics or experience.
About the longswords and its techniques i would state that they were duel weapons, with great Fehlschärfe (Ricasso), where someone could easy grab the weapon even bare handed. That would explain everything.
In a duel one would choose the weapon, which gives you the higher chance of winning.
This fact alone would have let the weapon survive as a dueling weapon. And that did not happen. There are some indications, that in that times, people still using the longsword were thought of as weaker opponents. But this is to simple for me and i do not believe this. And fashion or appearance alone is not a good valid reason, more a prevarication. The Rapier is not a light weapon. The longsword is only between 200g and 400g more heavy, than the Rapier and used mostly two handed. Which is nearly nothing, at least for me.
The Repair is always, at least to my knowledge, used one handed. Make the math.
Both swords have nearly the same length, with some exception.
So why would it be better suited for civilian self defense or a duel?
I think i have a guess. But about this we can talk tomorrow or next week, depends on my time. But at least i do not create false strawman or do some cherry picking.
[quote=“Dushin, post:72, topic:16147”]
Actually quite complicated but the gist is that armor use slowly declined with only cavalry and lightly armored musketeers using their swords a great deal of time.
[/quote] Depends on the knowledge and other things. But you are right about that. Side-sword is one indicating keyword.
Was it really forbidden for all? If it was forbidden, then for whom was it?
The japanese sword tradition flourished even in the decline of the samurai and bushi. There was only one short time, where it was in danger. Japanese simply honor their sword fighting and that did preserve their sword fighting through the times (the great arts).
I don’t see it, as the best sword fighting system, because such things depend on the warrior.
This probably didn’t seem to get through to you, but people today all over the world have tried the said technique with a sharp sword. Seriously email Matt Easton from Schola Gladiatoria. He has been teaching HEMA for over 14 years and has plenty of sword antiques and replicas. If your lucky he might even make a video demonstrating it with a sharp sword. Maybe you never held a sharp European sword but as long as you don’t slide you hands along it and don’t actually press your hands on the edge trying to make it bleed you will be fine.
What the hell are you talking about?
Well by that logic formal sword duels would have ended in 1540 with the introduction of a reliable wheellock pistol. However that did not happen because you cannot walk around all day with a loaded sixteenth century gun. The rapier evolved from a Spanish dress sword at this point and proved to be a most capable weapon when it was not used against an opponent wearing armor. I’ll point out again that the rapier was a little more fashionable than the “relic” from the middle ages called the longsword.
The rapier has a longer reach, even when used with a parrying dagger you will still outreach someone with a longsword. If you really want to get into detail I suggest you look up a few videos of rapiers vs. longsword. The guy with the rapier is usually “leading” the fight as he has a reach advantage.
Reasons named above, fashion, emergence of formal duels till first blood, protection in greater reach (compared to lets say a messer).
Wait.
I am trying to puzzle this together but what you mean is that longsword fencing disappeared because it was not honored and preserved?
One thing that I just thought I’d point out, is that what we identify as the longsword appeared in its prototypical forms in the mid/late-13th centuries (at least) and continued in use in SOME form (even if not extensively so) into the 17th century. That’s almost 400 YEARS of continuous usage. Even if you narrow down the longsword’s “prime” from 1350-1550, that still meets, if not exceeds, the duration of the rapier’s period of dominance (from about the late-16th and into the mid-17th/early-18th centuries).
Anyway, as for why the longsword fell out of favor:
It’s disappearance from the battlefield is pretty simple. Effective firearms meant the end of armor, and melee combat becomes increasingly less important as firearms improve. So essentially, the primary use to which the longsword was put on the battlefield (the sidearm of a heavily-armored infantry fighter) evaporated, particularly with the development of the bayonet to provide the rank-and-file’s primary melee capability (essentially turning the musket into a spear, and making pike-and-shot formations obsolete). Infantry officers retained the sword mainly due to the knightly tradition as a mark of prestige and rank, but adopted the backsword, sidesword, and later smallsword as they no longer had need of the heavier longsword. The longsword itself was primarily an infantry weapon due to its size, so generally was not used by cavalry to begin with (the shorter arming swords were used instead), which also turned to weapons such as the back and sidesword and, eventually, the sabre.
For civilian use, the longsword requires a LOT of room to maneuver and swing (I’ve got more than a few dings in my apartment walls that can attest to that). In a crowded street or the confines of alleyways where one might find themselves most in need of a means of self-defense against thugs and other ne’er-do-wells, thrusting swords are more useful because you need less room to thrust. The decline of armor also means you no longer need a particularly heavy blade, and speed becomes much more important for defense, and consequently, attack. The blade grew thinner and all the weight moved into the hilt. Resulting in a quick sword ideally suited for thrusting with substantial reach, but still able to be effectively maneuvered in tighter quarters (incidentally, this is also why the rapier was NOT well-suited to naval use, and why shorter swords such as the cutlass were used instead. Between the low heights of the decks down below, and obstructions such as rigging up top, the rapier was TOO LONG to be effective).
However, longswordsmen can (and do, in modern fencing) still hold their own against a rapier, because the longsword does have substantial advantages against the rapier. A rapier doesn’t have much hope of blocking or binding a longsword, nor of beating through a longsword’s defense, as both weapons weigh roughly the same, but the longsword has too much mass along the blade to move it effectively. Additionally, the rapier’s blade is much more prone to bending and breaking because of its slender dimensions (and this was a noted problem of the type, with many examples whose blades had been broken or bent during duels. Far more than of the more robustly-bladed longsword). And, as noted before, the fight-stopping ability of the rapier is notably problematic, as the thrust HAS to hit something vital, while a cut has better capacity of crippling or disabling a combatant even if the limb isn’t severed (and this IS a matter of documented fact. There’s a LOT of accounts of rapier/smallsword duels in which the combatants have received multiple stab wounds and kept going).
The rapier does have speed and, depending on the length, reach (though even the longswordsman could extend his reach quite a bit by thrusting with one hand).
And Silver (a dedicated proponent of the backsword) had a lot of quite nasty things to say about Italian rapier fencers along those same lines. Without better context (such as the time in which these comments were made) it’s hard to tell whether that’s an accurate assessment, or just snobbery at work. “Ugh! This man still uses the longsword? How uncouth!” Because fashion!
Do you agree that if you would grab bare handed my sword i need only to take a step back and with one fast and strong jerk pull the sword towards me, i will cut your hand? If yes, then good.
Do you know why the Two-handed (Highland) claymore had a Ricasso with even leather around it? Overall length 120 -140? Renaissance-Bidenhänder had the same and and even with Parierhaken. Those people who made it, were not stupid and they had the real battlefield experience with this weapons, in opposition to modern ‘sword fencers’.
The Parierhacken were for protection of the half -sworded hand, because the sword on sword gliding techniques, will cut into a hand. The leather was to absorb some of the forces, before they are transmitted to your hand.
Now to p = mv add . Or the momentum. Yes with that thing you can play pool or billiard.
Look at here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum
Look at elastic collisions of equal masses. And take a good look at Newton’s cradle.
You can even try it out, at home with one additional person. A knife and a hammer. You can hold the knife away with the sharp end of the blade away from your hand and (the best over a cutting board) and the person hits the dull side with a hammer. Then try it again with a oiled blade and a sweaty hand.
To stop (negative accerleration) an object, the same power has to be used that has accelerated it.
Meaning that that if you are able to hold a sword by the friction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction) if it is hit by the enemy’s sword, then you can catch the sword of the enemy with you bare hand while he is swinging it at you. And that is certainly something that i want to see first.
And if you made the experience of pushing something heavy on the floor like locker or wardrobe. Then you know that the frictions becomes less if you exercise a jerk or if the locker / closet is in movement. That means that the faster an object moves the less frictional force is applied, and moving an object becomes more easy .
Shooting example for forces over time:
The 9mm bullet in it self does not have much kinetic power, because of the Newton’s third law (FA = −FB), you can shoot it from a gun and holding the gun in the hand, while standing upright. But the bullet will penetrate in to your body. And the reason is that the forces of the bullet cannot be caught in time by the strucktural forces of your body and skin.
This is also a reason why you hammer in a nail (with just a small weight but fast movement), and do not slowly push it in, with the hammer and your whole body weight.
But how fast does a sword move? The tip of the blade will move at least as fast as a fastball (record 162,3 km/h average of a baseball league player is 145 km/h). The weight of an baseball is between 141,745 and 148,832 grams. How much Newtonmeter does a Longsword swing have? (With many simplifications against my position.)
First the length can be neglected we need only the mass of the tip. If we assume that half of its mass is in one quarter and the rest in the 3 quarter are, and the sword has a weight of 1500g, then we can assume for the hitting quarter a mass of 250g. And with the speed of an Fastball, it equals:
Work/Energy(Kinetic) swordattack = 1/2 m * v^2 = 0,125kg * (40,27 m/s)^2 = 0.125kg * 1621,6729 m^2/s^2 = 202,418225 kg m^2 /s^2 or simply 202 J or Nm. (Around 20kg lifted on meter.)
E(kin) = p^2 / 2 * m
p = mv = 0,25kg * 40,27 m/s = 10,0675 kg m/s
Friction is force ((F = m*a) / (friction coefficient)) and you got to hold this force in a specific space s doing a work against the attacking Work/Energy (Kinetic). Let us take the friction coefficient fo 0.8 for a dry hand and 0.3 for a sweaty hand, and with the specific space s of 1 cm. The required holding friction is:
Energy (Swordattack) / (friction coefficent) * (s) = Friction
1 Newton is 1kg * 1m / (1s)^2
202Nm/ (0,8 * 0,01m) = 25250N or 202/ (0,3 * 0,01m) = 67333N
This is the force necessary to lift around 2525kg or 6733kg. So if you are the next time lifting elephants with just your finger-thumb grip, then tell me, i want to see it.
Even if we assume s = 0,1m (cutting through your hand), then the numbers are 2525 N or 6733 N.
This is the force necessary to lift around 252kg or 673kg. Still beyond any pressure force, that a man can execute with his hand (in any case).
Even if i would assume the 50 km/h for a sword strike (a slow strike from which a person could nearly, run away) = 14 m/s: p = 0,25 kg * 14 m/s = 3,5 kg m/s
E(kin) = (3,5 kg m/s)^2 / 2 *(0,25kg) = 12,25 * (m/s)^2 / 0,5 = 25Nm (Around 2,5 kg lifted on 1 meter.)
25Nm / (0,8 * 0,01m) = 3125 N or 8333 N for the sweaty hand. Still beyond any pressure force, that a man can execute with his hand. Even for a 10 cm cushion range it is still too much with 312 N or 833 N.
The thumb-finger grip is on average 60 N on momentary hold and 35 N on sustained hold. Even a very strong guy would not press beyond the 180 N on a momentary hold, with his thumb-fingertips grip force. Naturally the grip strength of the hand is stronger (800N for 5%) but still below the necessary grip strength.
Do you know how i recognise frauds, liars, myths, false stories, superstitions or lack of knowledge? I check the physics first. Because one can lie and tell everything one wants, but nothing can betray the laws of physics.
Even beyond that the necessary reaction times of humans are not high enough, to exercise a force that would stop the sword.
Reactiontime for 1 cm on the 40,27 m/s is 1 / 4027 = 0,00025 sec.
Reactiontime for 1 cm on the 14 m/s is 1 / 1400 = 0,0007142 sec.
Thank you. (You were not meant.) But i talk about this:
Rapier around length 120cm, blade length 100cm and weight between 1kg and 1,3kg.
Longsword length 100 - 140cm, blade length 85 - 120cm with weight between 0,8kg and 1,8kg.
In our cases the blade length is important. Arm outstretched plus the length of the blade is the normal reach, for both opponents.
Fashion is not real a reason in duels, formal duels have been fought but also duels to death.
The japanese have a certain viewpoint on some of their martial arts, they see them as the great arts, somehow nearly like a religion with a great respect. That is the reason why Musashi has received the title of a living sword-saint.
We see the martial arts more like a means to an end. So we stop to train something if its use is deprecated, and if something similar or better arrives. The german fencing school simply was replaced by the french fencing school.
Whatever the reason was for doing it, but i do not believe, in the fashion reason.[quote=“Ambaryerno, post:75, topic:16147”]
The longsword itself was primarily an infantry weapon due to its size, so generally was not used by cavalry to begin with (the shorter arming swords were used instead), which also turned to weapons such as the back and sidesword and, eventually, the sabre.
[/quote] The polish winged hussars used the pallasz (up to 120cm) and the koncerz (over 130 -160 cm) sword from the horseback.
[quote=“Ambaryerno, post:75, topic:16147”]
thrusting swords are more useful because you need less room to thrust.
[/quote] Yes that is a true fact.
[quote=“Ambaryerno, post:75, topic:16147”]
The decline of armor also means you no longer need a particularly heavy blade, and speed becomes much more important for defense, and consequently, attack.
[/quote] The Riposte becomes essential in sword fighting techniques. That is what i wanted to show you with the polish film.I don’t know if the rapier is faster than the longsword, i have never seen any comparison.
But the rapier certainly is less heavy with the same lenght, but used only with one hand.
But you execute with the rapier a ‘jab’ which are very fast, and because of the jab and the attack cone, the attacked point is good hidden.
Do not forget to read, the following statement, or as a whole:
And also superficial cuts are not a showstopper.
[quote=“Ambaryerno, post:75, topic:16147”]
“Ugh! This man still uses the longsword? How uncouth!” Because fashion!
[/quote] That is a bad argument and a bad fighting technique in a duel to death.
Edit:
There are many things, that i have to state about this and that will be very long.
But: The differences are very fewer, than one may think, and i kept saying this the whole time.
On Friday i will write again, hopefully only about this.
Fashion is a major reason for nearly EVERYTHING in Western culture. Just look at the gigantic rims, enormous spoilers, and other ridiculous things people do to cars that serve no practical purpose and are just there for fashion and style.
A bit more relevant to the discussion of weaponry: The garnet cloisonne work used on the pommel caps of Anglo-Saxon period swords (some of my FAVORITE sword designs, by the way. Beautiful weaponry) serve no practical purpose. The pattern-welding of Migration-era Germanic sword blades does, but the specific patterns in the surface of the blade (herringbone, Serpent in the Sword, Stars in the Night, etc.) were devised strictly for the sake of artistry. The cloisonne pommels fell out of fashion towards the later Saxon period as other artistic developments took precedence (lobed pommels, wire inlay, etc).
It’s mainly in the matter of point control. Swords designed primarily for the thrust have the weight concentrated in the hilt. This includes both the single-handed rapier, as well as the two-handed estoc. Putting all the weight in the hilt allows for more and quicker control over where the point is going.
Doesn’t mean the longsword doesn’t have a lot of fine control as well, as the leverage of the second hand provides a lot of help in twitching the point through windings.
And when talking about the rapier, that’s pretty much all the sort of cuts you’re making. The cuts the longsword delivers, however, tend to be much more devastating. Major targets are slicing the undersides of the wrists (tendons to control the fingers, pretty much disabling the hand) or under the armpit (ditto to the whole arm). If you can get around to a cut the back of the knee that will easily collapse the leg. Most of these don’t even take powerful shearing blows, either. The push/pull action of the front and back hands alone can provide all the torque needed to do the job. All of those wounds are pretty effectively going to end the fight, and that’s not even all of them.
Also from this same crossing
I have grasped your sword in this way:
And before your sword escapes my hand,
By striking I will deal with you like a foul villain.
Fiori
Lets take a look at the highland claymore of 120-140 cm length in art depictions and actual remaining ones.
A surprising lack of leather bound Ricasso’s, I do know some German examples had those leather straps but the highland and Gallowglass ones seem to lack it.
I’ve yet to see this happen consistently outside of anime.
If you can stand the music try to watch a part of this tournament, you never force yourself through a blocking movement but instead pass around it.
I am afraid it’s getting a little wuzzy for me here.
If you hit someone with a sword swing the power of the said swing will exert itself at the point of contact which happens to be a relatively sharp edge, if you hold a sword and grip it by the flat you have a larger surface area no?
Wait what, where did you get the idea they stop a sword blow with their bare hands? Are you putting those words in my mouth because I did not say such a thing.
For all your knowledge on physics you seem to forget that the rapier and longsword stance are different. A rapier can fight with nearly outstretched arms, a longsword can not.
A longsword is held with two hands so you stand squarely by default, a rapier wielding guy without dagger can assume a virtually complete sideway stance.
I did not imply formal duels were never to death, I just said some etiquette were observed. The rapier fitted better with the clothes and image of that day, even people that never fought a fight in their live would wear a rapier at the royal court.
no more armor = no more longswords
You at first stated that you did not believe the longsword was inferior to the rapier. So I made a list of reasons to contributed to it’s decline among which was fashion, it was not the sole reason but it did count.
Organ crushing corsets, flea infested wigs, strangling collars, high heels. Ah yes fashion
Only for your interest (maybe) and a direct comparison:
Longsword (reconstruction, late 15th cent.), Officers Smallsword/epee (original 2nd half 18th cent), Gentlemens Smallsword/epee (original 2nd half 18th cent)
In a fight between life and death you give a f… about fashion and artistry, you will insist on using a sword that gives you the higher rate of survivability, and not on the beauty of your weapons. Which school prevailed in duels, and which school was attended after the duels is more a major factor (at least i believe it). A interesting thing has happened in Nihon with Kendo fighting. There are two schools in Kendo the longsword Daito school and the Nito school which uses the two swords fighting techniques. With simple words: the problem between this schools has been settled with real swords, and nowadays the long two handed Daito school is tought to the beginners.
If i would be trained in using the longsword, and somebody would then challenge me to a duel, i would fight with the longsword and not with the rapier. And if i would see how a master in rapier fencing is killed by a longsword master, and knew nothing about fighting, i would definitly learn to use the longsword and not the rapier.
Most duels were done in a place, where there was enough space for the duel. Therefore also the argument about the necessary space, does not hold its ground. And in a tavern one could use, a dagger or a smaller sword.
In the polish commonwealth, the people used to carry with them the ‘horseman pick’ everywhere (as a training for the arm strengh), they did not even bothered to draw the saber. Instead the horseman’s pick was the weapon of choice in every street / tavern brawl, this was also the reason why later it was forbidden to carry it. Sabers on the other hand were fine, to cut off somebody’s head was ok, but not to smash it.
The longsword is not that much heavier then the rapier with the additional weight of 200g to 400g. And certainly not that much larger, perhaps 10cm because of the larger hilt. Overall the population in europe did not increased that much, from 1400 to 1600, too explain the vanishing of the use of the Longsword by the cities density.
Perhaps the rapier fencers attacked the hands of the longsword fencers, while their own were better protected?
Perhaps the rapier fencers executed a better standing position (sideways) that gave them additional few centimeters of attack range, and reduced their own attack surface?
Perhaps the rapier fencers riposte is better or faster, than the longsword fencers counterattack?
Perhaps the rapier fencers could better hide the attacked target point, till it has hit?
Perhaps the rapier fencers have developed a better footwork?
Perhaps the rapier fencers can move faster in and out of the attack range?
Perhaps the rapier fencers had better feint attacks?
Perhaps the rapier fencers have used their dagger, while pinning down the longsword?
Perhaps the rapier fencers had stabbed the longsword fencers with their daggers, as they grabbed their rapiers?
Perhaps the rapier fencers threat is better, than those of the Longsword fencers?
This factors would be more important (if one of them would be valid), than any ‘fashion’ prevarications. Fashion is for survivors, and therefore you got to survive first, before you can think about fashion. This applies in the human society and in the nature. If i would train the rapier fencing, then i would understand it better, currently i can only guess. Or if i would fight one. Hmm perhaps i will see.
Now that thing with the control is clear for us all, but doing Iaido with one hand and with two hands i would prefer to use a sword and technique with both hands. But it does not indicate the actual speed of movement. Because the speed is given by the extraction speed of the arm and hand and the movement of the shoulder and the overall movement of the body.
And that is the same for both weapons. I would even state that a good coordination of both arms used together at the same time is equally fast as ‘one handed’ use. For what a rapier attack stands out, in my opinion is the unpredictability of the attack by the given possible cone (more a hourglass form) of attack.
A longsword attack is nearly always (besides the stabbing attack) indicating the attack point, if it is used as a cutting weapon.
The ‘rapier’ fencing schools, despite that the rapier was used for only 150-200 years, prevailed and survived till today, because of the use of the smallsword. There is even a clear evolution line and transitional forms (‘Colichemarde’) and has nearly the same fighting style and techniques, and because of the ‘Burschenschaft’ and their ‘Mensur’ duels in german space and other things in other spaces.
I will raise my both hands up lifting your sword ( i have the better lever),
simultaneously jump back out of your reach
and pull with a jerk my sword out of your hand, cutting you at the same time.
Zawisz_Charny 2014
Always experiment under as real possible conditions as you can. In any sword fencing school you will find someone, who wants to try something in that kind out. But try it really good out, with different partners and changing the two positions. All such things, like many other martial art systems are called ‘Bauernfänger’. Against well trained people they will not work, like a scholar’s mate, and can even cost you dear in the end.
The video about holding a sword barehanded: I would like to say that i would like to test this, with this guy.
With a sword that i would have sharpened, and i will pull it out of his hand. But i cannot say this, because i know how this would end, and for him and for me would it end very bad. One guy would lose his fingers, the other guy would land in prison or have to pay much money. Naturally you can hold also a steel scalpel or any sharp knife in a hand without cutting your self, and you can even pull it. But you know what will happen if it begins to slide in the holding hand, and that depends also on the speed and force of the pull to overcome the friction hold.
And once the first move is made and the friction hold is gone, the sliding effort shrinks (think about the wardrobe).
And he uses the friction of his hand to pull, but this would be very small if the pull would be fast. He does not slide along his hand, his partner does not pull the sword out, with a jerk, therefore he can hold it.
There are many thing that are false in this video, concerning a sword fight and holding a sword, first of all a fight is very fast and everyone tries constantly to attack, therefore everyone is in movement . So don’t try this at home.
Such people make me angry, because many of them know this, but others who do not understand this will try this out, and will cut himself.
Also i dont know why people assume that a sword is sharp, because it can cut paper. Nearly all my kitchen knives can do it, and i know that they are dull. I have sharpened once some of my kitchen knives, and that was a great time of fear for me, that my wife will cut herself. And since then, i have not sharpened my knives in my kitchen. And my wife can cook, without that, that i die from a heart attack.
It seems that the definition of sharpness depends on the person that uses the word.
Steel scalpels are also not so sharp (they are quite sharp) like most people think, but obsidian scalpels are very f… sharp. Some indians in the ‘Mississippi region’ have made arrow tips out of obsidian, that are much sharper than modern steel scalpels. Normally the sharpness of an edge depends on many things like angle of the material and some of the material properties. Also sharp does not necessary mean a good cutting bite.
Claymores:
Yes you are right about that, that most of the Claymores do not have a leather bound Ricassos. But i found also a very good explanation for this. It appears only later on a reworked german Greatswords. The real scootish claymore is NOT a stabing sword, it is only a cutter (slasher). Nearly all early claymors have nearly dull tips like some viking swords and also the celtic ‘brass’ swords. And even later in the early 17th century many swords still have this kind of tip, some have even rounded tips, and only very few have a sharp tip.
It seems that the scottish clan warriors relied on their strength and the force of the impact too cut down their enemies. I say only highland games.
Also the large two handed grip allows a good controlled slashing. Half-swording on a not stabbing weapon, would be not that kind of useful and would reduce the force of the impact to nearly useless.
I could not find a good museum side for this, but this people are specialised for original scottish claymores and their replicas from museums. I have been fooled by the Wallace’s sword, which is not a Claymore, and probaly not his sword and perhaps a fake. And as desciption that have devised this form as the archtype of all claymores.
About the vido of HEMA;
Yes this is how it looks like, and now think about grabing a sword, which is under constant pull and push.
Then you have to do some kendo, it does happen quite very often, even without any intentions, while parry. Jaaaaaaa!!! Kote! And there you have it.
I see you lack the basics in understanding of physics, but this is not a problem, i will try to explain it better. Mea culpa.
To hold something in this way (by friction) you need to excerices a force that has to greater (x*F), then the attacking force (F).
There is a law that governs our physical world: that is the law of conservation of energy and momentum. (Basically it is the same, and it is so universal that you can’t even believe it.)
Pool example:
If you hit the white ball, then the ball translates its Energy (Kinetic) or the Momentum on the other red ball, then the other ball can go into the hole, by the same momentum that you have given to first ball, with some loss due to the friction of the pool table itself.
In sword practice it means, that you can hit the not moving enemy sword, and now his sword moves into the direction with the same energy that you have given to it, by your hit. The Newton’s cradle demonstrates it very good. Now to stop this movement, you have to exercise a force in a certain space. If the space is small, then the force has to be great.
And that is what i have counted for you out. I have assumed between 1cm and 10cm to stop the sword with the two different speeds. First for a good speed of an sword attack with 145km/h, and second with very slow 50km/h.
So this physics shows that you cannot stop with just the friction of your bare hand, a sword attack or your sword that has recieved the momentum or has now the kinetic energy from the attack. This physical evaluations are very simplified, because it should consider also the weight of the sword and the arm, applied then to the speed with the right torque, but then it would have been even less understandable for you, and the result would be the same, only even more speak for my position.
I have a done this very simple experiment that i have wrote in the last post, but with a metall ruler and wooden one (both 4cm broad) and a hairbrush (65g). I could not hold the rulers by my thumb-finger grip strength, as i have hit them with the hairbrush, just using the speed given only from my triceps and hand. And since i have quite the arm strength, i also doubt, that anyone else could do it, if i would strike the ruler. The wooden ruler did break in two, in the air, already outside my hand (it was in a bad shape) and has cut (thankfull not the Subcutis) with its dull side my finger.
But overall think that one can hit your sword, and then you can be cut by your own sword, so it is not necessary to be hit directly. Especially if you are half-swording it. I can attack your hand directly or hit your sword, which is nearly the same due to the laws of physics.
No, you haven’t said it. But this is results from the physics to stop the momentum of the sword attack if you are holding it, with the bare hand. If you can parry a sword attack, with your own sword and just the friction of your bare hand. Then you can catch the same sword attack with the friction of your bare hand. Simple physics. The reactiontime that i have wrote, would apply if somebody would press on his own sword. Only in that moment that the sword has been hit, where he would have had the maximal strength to press the sword.
No i haven’t forgotten it. I assume that a longsword wielder can do the same, so they cancel eachother out. Even if the rapier wielding guy has a main-gauche. But i have to say that rapier wielding guy has a little better protected stance and his attacks are made to go in and out of attack distance. In all depictions.
Yes that is correct. But i think this would be kind of odd, in all times:
Rapier fencer: I choose a swords duel.
Longsw.fencer: Ok. I take my longsword.
Rapier fencer: Non! You cant.
Longsw.fencer: Why? Both swords have the same length.
Rapier fencer: Mon Dieu. Because, i have a rapier. Vous êtes un crétin.
Longsw.fencer: So. Who cares?
Rapier fencer: You can kill me, with that longsword thing, and also ruine mes vêtements.
Longsw.fencer: Yes. But i want to kill you. Like you want to kill me.
Rapier fencer: You don’t understand. You don’t have the esprit.
Longsw.fencer: The what?
Rapier fencer: You have no sense of ‘fashion’. You péquenaud. I will go now. Au revoir! Longsword. Pha.
Quel imbécile.
(no more armor == no more longswords) != true
A long sword could not cut through the chainmail or the plate armor. Therefore the disappearing of the longsword is not due to this condition.
Also other the disappearing of the armor did not enabled other weapons with lower penetration to take its position. Because of the above mentioned statement. Also both armors did not disappear in 17th century, they ended only their valid use on the battlefield in the 18th century even after the rapier. The Kürassiere still used their armor in till WWI.
If the rapier and longsword are equal in many aspects and both can be called on pair equal, then ‘fashion’ could explain the vanishing of the longswords. But only then. And this is the problem: they are not equal in use, they are fundamentally different.
And to search for a reason why something functions and why not is, this is also what a martial artist has to do.
This is a lifetime journey. And the pitfalls are many, and one of the biggest is: a too simple explanation.
Also very often:
Conformation / expectation bias, and bad sources.
Edit:
Bla… Bla…
,_1622,_book_illustration.JPG)
