Interesting Documentary about a medieval Fight Book

Combat system
#81

Make that all duels, because a duel is by the very definition of the word a (semi) formal occasion. It’s the mugging in a narrow alley and such you have to watch out for.

The Germans were fond of the Messer but the moment you step outside the rapier has an advantage, besides I wouldn’t worry about getting attacked inside a tavern as much as just outside it with a gang of 5 piss drunk unemployed soldiers liking the rich clothes you wear or the big coin purse.

That is actually a prime example of fashion. France and Germany both had upper class heavy cavalry who used those weapons in wartime to deadly effect. However outside of war no one would bring a horseman’s pick with him because you couldn’t really get seen with one nor was it considered to be a knightly or classy weapon like the sword.

Regarding rapier vs. longsword in civilian context.

The top comment on this video summarizes it very well.

You misunderstood what he is saying. He is referring to the fact that a balance point closer to the hilt gives more point/tip control. It allows for more precise thrust placements which is why thrusting orientated swords favor swords with a balance point near the hilt.

Look at the picture again, see how the sword is already hovering above his head? I’d say it’s close to game over for that man.

I’ve been to Scotland a few times and what several curators told me is that the whole claymore thing became even more popular when armor was abandoned and musket wielding line infantry was the norm. Back than bayonets had to be plugged in the barrel of the musket so you couldn’t fire with it. The tactic of the highlanders was to charge such a line of musket infantry and drop to the ground moments before they shot thereby avoiding most of the bullets. Then they would rise and proceed to beat the Brits in melee combat since they had claymores and one handed swords with targes. No need to have a stabby tip against those redcoats, plain slashing will do fin and look better to :smile:

Well actually there you have it, it happens in kendo not in HEMA which does have halfswording.

No that’s the problem you can’t really since that would put the longsword at a disadvantage. The rapiers center of mass in close to the hilt making it relatively point accurate, a longsword has a point of balance further up the hilt making it somewhat harder to use in one hand. Holding it at two hands would of course reduce your reach even further.

I am quite sure it would have been the exact reverse of that. The fact that longsword teachers such as Silver had to denounce the rapier in their works probably meant they were more popular than their longswords. See the video above.

You just angered a lot of PhD Historians.

The general idea is there but you are missing a lot of nuances and background information. I really suggest you read up on history in your Uni’s library because I can’t really walk you through the entire history of arms and armor of 1600-1871 on this forum.

1 Like
#82

Here’s an interesting video in which a man grabs the blade of a katana and disarms the person who had it, and uses it to scare them away, being left with a cut on his hand:

Although because it bent easily, and seemed to fail to cut the hoodie, and was the property of robbers, I think the sword was probably not made of good metal.

I remember once reading that in world war 2, a Japanese (or Niponese, I don’t know what to say) man tried halfswording with his katana, as he was trained, but got a cut hand.

Zawisza Czarny, from what you say you seem to be very knowledgeable of Japanese swordfighting, and footwork, and unarmed fighting. Perhaps people reconstructing European fencing would benefit from people of a surviving direct line martial art, although it would be important to be aware of any differences between two sorts of weapon.
You have said that you doubt Talhoffer’s books, partly because it says to grip the blade, which you think would not make sense if it were sharp, and probably also doubt most of the other known surviving European Fencing books. Half-swording is shown so much, it seems as though it was an important part of swordsmanship. How could this be if they likely to injure their hands?
As far as I know, European swords were not as sharp as Japanese swords. You seem to have a lot of your knowledge of swordsmanship from Japanese swordsmanship, and I would be interested in knowing how much you have learnt of both Kendo and Kenjutsu. The high-speed kendo video did not look like practical swordfighting to me, because they were splitting each other’s skull within the same fraction of a second, and having one person being declared the winner.
Perhaps European swords were not so sharp that halfswording was impractical. Further up in this conversation, there was a German video in which Roland Warzecha, known for sword and buckler work, had his friend hold a sword by the handle as he held the blade, and they pulled and Roland’s hand remained uncut. Roland’s sword was not so sharp that an opponent would not be able to grab it safely, but he had shown that he could cut a tatami mat with it.

What I seem to remember you saying earlier about a way to test this safely, by wearing a metal glove below a leather glove, I think is quite a good idea.

You have doubted the effectiveness of Talhoffer’s machines. I have myself not looked at them that closely myself, so I will take your word for it, and I’ve got some suggestions.
The drawing style is quite different to the perspective drawing used a lot in the Renaissance, and may not actually look like a man’s eye view, but something folded out to show many parts in one picture, unlike Leonardo’s art, and many other people’s.
Secondly, if with that taken into account it still seems as though the machines would not work, then you may have to ask Talhoffer himself how they work, and that may be what he wanted. Selling his services for money, and so not putting everything about it in his book, because then they would not need to hire him.
You have also said that some of the techniques in the book by Ludwig VI von Eyb, other than halfswording, would not work well. I am unfortunately not knowledgeable enough to criticise that, although I could try them out with a partner.

1 Like
#83

Yes cheap and dull. Perhaps a $50 thing. I do not even dare to name this a sword, despite its shape.
I believe sharpness in itself has no direct measurement, besides the sharpening angle of the blade. But i call a blade sharp, if i can shave my arm, with it. Because that means, that the mechanical resistance of my hair, gives enough force. That i can cut the hair, without a cutting motion (horizontal to the cutted object). But even this test is quite questionable, and depends on the body hair and etc.
Let us look at the example of the Legend, of how Salah ad-Din and Richard Lionheart have demonstrated the sharpness of their swords. Richard Lionheart has cut through a thick iron ‘thing’, showing that his sword with his strength can cut even through iron, and remain sharp. Salah ad-Din has thrown up a light silk scarf and has cut through this. Question is: who has won? Think over it.

Modern measurments show that the medival fighting swords, had a angle between 20° and 30°, with a good steel (complicated) and a correct heattreating it can be quite sharp. A Daito is sharpened, by a specific learned (it takes years to learn it) sharpener for over 120 hours. We can certainly compare different swords diameter and mass and use and etc, but that would be to far and to deep into the details.
And against what i have written for the simplification and for the point that other have made in a false context: a blade can become more brittle due to its sharpness, which results in less mass = diameter of the material to catch the forces that are on the sword by its use, and due to a to hardening prozess (quenching) and the faster kristalisation within a thiner blade. But that does not mean necessary that a thin blade has to be brittle and to break faster than a thicker blade. (It’s more complicated than that.) Japanese smiths had their own tricks, to make a blade thin, hard and not brittle, by influencing the quenching prozess, and using different steels in one sword.
Europeans used the some comparable technologies and had also their damascus steel, perhaps they even had better steels. So told: i do not believe that the european technique was far behind the japanese, i would even state that perhaps we were better in this aspect.

The proper terminus is Nihonjin. Nihon or Nipon is Japan, by the two kanji for Hi for Sun and Hon/Moto for book, begin, origin and main. And naturally Jin / Hito is for human or person.

The differences between this arts is less, then one might believe, especially in former times. Modern Kendo only has been optimised in a specific direction. Many things that are depicted on the page that Dushin has posted a link, have been used in Kendo (with a little change) and are still in Iaido.

Half swording may be a very good fighting technique in certain situations, but you got to ensure your safety first. And then you got to make yourself clear, that even a dull blade can break your hand bones, if the forces are strong enough. I would wear a full mail mitten on my left hand to ensure, the safety of my left hand, this would be enough to prevent a cut of my hand. Or would use a sword with a dull edge on the place where i would grab the blade, it would be enough to have sharpened only one side, and to have an engraving to show which side i can grab.
Half Swording is even used in some asian sword fighting and japanese sword fighting schools, but they lay only their hand on the dull side of the blade. I believe this has a reason. :wink:
I do criticise the Half Swording in itself and i would not do it, this has also a reason coming from Kendo, but more important is that i criticise the grabbing of a sharp edge on the blade with the bare hand, in a situation where you cannot ensure that the grabbing force is not strong enough to cut your hand. Or where the push and pull forces, are not below the friction forces that you exercise by the grip force and your hand friction coefficient.
You can grab a sharp knife / sword and pull or push it even without a cut, i have never stated the opposite, but in a fight everything is different, and murphy’s law is always on.
F… there are even stories where a person has been pulled out of a swamp by grabbing a sharp blade with their hand. But nobody believed this stories. But in a fight where you sweat and the movement is fast and strong, it is very unbelievable that you can effectively do it and without a injury.
The historians are even in the two camps: First the swords were dull. Second the swords were sharp, but they could grab the sharp edge. I have to look though the books where the depictions start to depict the grabbing with bare hands, and where it ends (if it ends).
For a simple test: You can try to grab polished steel with sweaty bare hands, and see how it all behaves (grip and etc). I have this experience.

I doubt Thalhoffer’s book, because:
1)
The necessary knowledge for the functionality of the many things that he had depicted, was discovery much later (At least 300 years in some cases). This was not a knowledge, that has been given in secrecy, but it simply didn’t exist, therefore it had to be discoverd first. His design of the tank, are simply unpractical in any terms, like that from Leonardo. None of this technical things were ever made, not even once. As already told Leonardo had at least a background and interests in this things, but not Thalhoffer, and Leonardo was a fantastic observer.
And we know of many things, that have been made in the past, even by the romans, greeks and other nations in ancient times. I even believe that Archimedes has builded his heat ray, despite what the Mythbusters say. Why?
Because the principle is functioning and Archimedes was clearly smarter than the Mythbusters guys.
2)
Some grabbing techniques would not even work, with a dull sword, because the lever will not be in favor of the grabbing person. And that is quite a killer.
3)
He depicts the bare handed grip on the sharp edges of the sword, in a fight.
What we know about Thalhofer is that he was judge in fencing duels. Further the historians assume that the tourney ‘mêlée’ was made with dull weapons. (The Statute of Arms of Edward I of England of 1292 says that blunted knives and swords should be used in tournaments.)
But if the fencing duels were made like a tourney ‘mêlée’, but only between two persons and were simply derived from the tourney 'mêlée, then perhaps were also the duel weapons, in such events.And that can be supported by the depiciton of the use of the sword and buckler, which was not that important on a real battlefield, despite the Tercios units.

Ahh something about the Tercios, Musketeers and the arming sword and side sword and the rapier. For this thread.
The medival arming sword has developed over the time, to the side sword (Spada da Lato) and this side sword has been, then optimised to the rapier form over the years. The Tercios used the side sword, but it also became thinner and longer over the years. The Musketeers used a rapier at the beginning, and later only strengthened the blade, to a typical musketeer sword. But the fighting techniques were nearly the same with this weapons, and this are the schools that continued (with changes) till today.
The fighting with the rapier is not fighting with just the rapier, it is an continuous development of fighting with a one handed sword, using special elaborate techniques to control your movement and the enemy, but not sloppy fighting tricks.

To Kendo and Kenjutsu:
Kendo has been developed, because the injuries with even a wooden sword (bokken) in Kenjutsu were to heavy. Death, eye injuries and broken bones, were very often. Therefore something better had to be invented, and some inventions made it even safer, like the four segment shinai (Yotsuwari-Shinai). Also the dangerous fighting techniques (grabbing and throwing the enemy, ground fighting, etc) and hitting zones and have been removed to ensure the safety of the practioner. Today there is a great difference between today’s Kendo and pre war Kendo and Kenjutsu.
Kendo has also developed some things, that are quite ‘hmmm’. Kenjutsu would be the nearest approximation to a real sword fight, while Kendo is more / only a sport. But also the real sword fight training is not as real as people might think. It is simply difficult to construct a training that teaches a very real combat behavior, without injuries.
But what Kendo really good achieves, is the control / precision over the sword (shinai) and to train the movement speed of it, and to develop a better / good footwork, than this would be done with a Kenjutsu-ryu, or even european swordfighting (not fencing), because this is it’s main purpose / weapon of Kendo sport.
If you look at this video you might think that they are hitting each other with full force, but this is false. They are ‘slightly’ touching eachother, with the shinai. Control, precision and speed is important, in Kendo. Because if you can control your shinai to slightly touch your enemy, then you also can cut very good through him. If one fights in a Kendo against beginners or against advanced people, one really feels the difference, if one gets hit.
Also the Ki-Ken-Tai-Ichi (Spirit-Sword-Step are one, but i call it more Koe-Ken-Tai-Ichi) and Zanshin, that means that you hit does only count, if the hit is correctly done according to this. This lowers the importance of ‘any’ hit, but emphasises the precision, the shout (Spirit) and footwork in a hit. A combination of Kendo / Iaido and Kenjutsu trained for a long time, can make a superior cutting sword fighter, in any aspect. But who has the time, the will and resources to do it?

Someone who has similar opinions in some points (despite i don’t like this show), but not all:
Longsword vs Ken:


Especially the sharpness in certain points of the german longsword.

I have not practiced Kenjutsu (sadly i always wished to do it, but since i’m not dead it might still happen), but i have a advanced rank in Kendo and iaido. Further in my youth i have trained for years a modern style of Kung-Fu and later Jiu-Jitsu, but have stayed at lower belts, despite my training with black belts.
Was to lazy for the examination, and some people had black belts despite their lacking abilities.
But ended at Kickboxing and later Thai Boxing (Muay Thai) just for fun, and without ring fighting, before i switched to Kendo and Iaido. But what makes me confident about my fighting knowledge is my real fight experience, that has ended with a lot of scars and a lot of problems. Thankfully this has never ended in a court.
I have a major flaw: i cannot give in or be a coward (smart man). But i can be convinced by a good argumentation.

I know the video from Roland, but my answer is: Look at aikido and think about it. What is happening there? I have posted the link to the video, about this Karate master for a certain reason. Use your brain, you are smart enough.

Also a errata:
Roland is not telling the whole truth, but he is not a liar, in that sense. He undestands many many things (but not everything) and tries them out.

Skallagrim is the nice german goth weirdo, but he has a good portion of knowledge. And in the videos that i have seen, he is not telling any real head breaking nonsens, some are even quite good.

Scholagladiatoria has a lot of knowledge about european swords, but in his post about the ‘Katana’ he fails in some aspects.

To test something out, with safety precautions that nobody gets hurt, is always a good idea. And yes try every technique out with several friends and different positions carefully out.
Even better, begin to train a martial art, with the emphasis on self defence. Ju-Jutsu with Moay Thai is a strong combo, and brasilian Ju-Jutsu for ground fighting, also Krav Maga is interesting, despite i have no knowledge about it.
Do this for 3-4 years, and then begin to train a sword fighting technique

#84

Neither really, Saladin died 5 months later from exhaustion and Richard a few years later because he got shot by an ordinary fellow.

Have you looked at the video I posted?

Well not all pictures might have been interpreted correctly but holding the blade when “the lever” is against you does not matter if you use your other hand to detach his head from his shoulders before he can react. He can’t use his sword if you grabbed it and he can’t defend from yours either. A five year old can beat an MMA fighter at arm wrestling if he sticks a knife in his eye and through his brain with the other hand.

Ouch, those blunt swords

Judicial duels were not phony fights with blunted swords. They were given sharp weapons and god would decide who was right.

The sword and buckler men in the Spanish Tercios did not use bucklers but bigger metal shields called rotella’s or alternatively Targets/Targett. The small buckler was used by English Archers on the battlefield.

Please do tell.

#85

@DUSHIN
Thank you, for reminding me to give an answer to your former post.

If you have read the previous sentence, then you would know that i have addressed his points. For a discussion you need a longer attention span, than just one sentence. But you should understand, that two things are needed for a sword fight: control / precision and speed. And i have addressed this two points, in both two handed swords and one handed.

Yes and depicting someone in a lying position, and say now i do a coup de grâce, is as useful as one additional hole in the arse.
It is important how do it came to a certain position, form which a killing blow can be delivered, without a possibility to avoid it. About this depiction:
Most probable the swords were crossed for a small time, or even the grabbing person parried the attack with the lower part of the sword. And afterward he grabbed the sword of his enemy. Also this depiction rather shows, that the swords are still crossed. The position of the fighter who’s sword has been grabed, is very dangerous, his left side is entirely open, but his head is not a real problem, because he can raise his sword to protect himself, and lower his upper body. And the grab hold of the sword and the lever, indicate more that the sword should be hold so that this left side will be attacked, not his center (torso) or his head. In other case Fiore would been an idiot.

There are three possible actions for the defender:
First: Is to flee from this position, and this is what i have written, but is very dangerous because of the left side and the reach of the attacker’s sword. (This is the opportunity that i have given you.)
Second: Is to attack and to closing the distance, by lifting his sword and stepping forward with this left leg on the right side of the right leg of the attacker. This leaves the attacker no room for a sword attack and gives you a better position.
Third: This action is to equalise the situation, by lifting his sword, doing a small step forward and grabbing the sword of the attacker at the cross gard and grip.
Also Fiori is in the knowledge, that the sword will escape his hand, but the question is if he does this in knowledge of a sacrifice, or if he assumes that his hand escapes unharmed.

They probably meant the one handed claymore, and not the two handed ones. Look at the link that i have posted as a source and the swords, they are dated.

Kote is the attack to the sword wielding hands. In HEMA they wear gauntlets, and i doubt if it counts as a point if you hit them. But if an enemy has naked hands or the gauntlets are to open, then a attack towards the hands would or could be decisive (not lethal).

I dont think so. Because you can always stretch the main arm totally out, you should even do this if you attack, at least in Kendo.

Sadly i cannot watch this video, because of GEMA but i have seen others. And the HEMA videos did not displayed the rapier fighting in a good way. But this one is very nice, despite this is a fight between older man (hmm i’m also not so young anymore), and both using rapiers (Spanish and Italian schools):


There you see very good, some principles of rapier (renaissance) fencing, like the constant threat, the feeling and the footwork. And this are also the points that in nearly all german longsword fighting videos and depictions i have missed, but this are found in Kendo.
Perhaps the longsword fencers should learn fencing first,before they try to reconstruct the fighting style of the german longsword?
Today in Kendo there are only two positions that are still used (there are five), because they have proved to be the best for attack: Chūdan-no-kamae and Jōdan-no-kamae. Look them up.

??? Honestly you cannot cut through a chain mail or a plate armor with a sword or a longsword or even a bihänder. Not even with a tulwar or a saber. You can pierce through it, sometimes tear the chain mail apart, but not cut. Metal is to hard and body is to soft. Simple as it is.
The Longsword had a niche, but something took it away. And that can be the rapier and / or the battlefield tactics. But it did not disappear, because of the armor. And the polish hussars still used some swords, that were as long as the longsword is, from a horse back till 1685 or even longer.
The armor in poland was used by the hussars, at least till 1699 on the battlefield and till 1724 for parades. The french cuirassiers did wear armor till WWI, also the italian and spanish units. The austrain cuirassiers droped it in 1860. About the german and the russian cuirassiers i have no information, but they ceased to exist in 1917 / 1918.
Naturally the cartridge was the coup de grâce for the armor, but nowadays seems that the armor is appearing again.
Therefore this is a weak straw man, and anyone who reads deeper and has a longer attention span, will ask himself some questions:

And you should erase it, because you have missed what i was saying.

Nearly all beside the one, where GEMA is interfering.

??? If you cannot hold the blade in a slow motion, then you cannot hold the blade in a fast motion.

This things can also kill if they are blunt, or could even ripping off limbs. But what troubles me is one of the pictures, that you have posted. Where one Knight in armor pierces through an armor of the enemy with just one arm on his two handed warhammer. Kind of contradicts the Armor Penetration thread. And in the Maciejowski-Bibel, there are depicted swords cutting through iron helmets and chain mail, and people who are wrestling (without a weapon) and winning, against lions.
Does it prove that that it is possible?

Not according to Ignacio & Ivan Notario Lopez, they speak explicit about buckler. But perhaps this is a translation problem, like the rapier?
Some bucklers had the same size like a rodela. Perhaps both types have been used?
Please look at this before you write an answer.

And ARMA states this:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/SwordandBuckler.htm#.U4p0m_l_uDo

Reason for the use of different steel kinds. The size of the Ken. The executing cutting techniques and the resulting use and cutting abilities.

#86

My bad I read over the first bit.

The one handed sword would be a backsword with a targe shield, that was definitely not what they meant. They were used far into the seventeenth century. Certainly before that but they did not come fully into their right until the Highland charge was effective against musket wielding red coats.

I really don’t know whether you are talking about some dramatic push of swords in anime or an attack on the hands. But yes you wear gauntlets in HEMA, that said in a real fight you would not spend two hours hitting each other with swords it would be over earlier.

Why is this so hard to comprehend? with a one handed sword you can stand sideways almost in the line while someone with a 2 handed sword has to stand wider. He has to bring the foot further away to the side otherwise you lock your second arm. Grab a broom and stand the length of the broom+ the length of one outstretched arm away from a wall. Now try to touch the wall with the broom with one hand, as you can see you can barely reach it. Now hold the broom in two hands and try to touch the wall from the same distance. You can’t unless your other arm is the length of your arm+the width of your torso and shoulder.

Get a proxy to watch it, it’s 2014 the internet has been around long enough to learn to avoid those pesky folks at GEMA.

I should have referred to the false cause one.

1: Plate armor is virtually immune to sword cuts
2: Longswords of the later period were thrust orientated
3: Longswords were more effective against armor

No of course they didn’t cut through plate armor I never said that, but out of all the swords we see today it is the best suited towards taking someone in armor down. The longswords niche is that it was extremely suited as a sidearm in an era where plate armor was relevant on the battlefield.

The Polish hussars used armor themselves but fought mostly unarmored folks except for cuirassiers, and even the armor of the Polish Hussars would class them as light cavalry during the late middle ages. The French cuirassiers wore a breast and backplate with a helmet which is nearly nothing compared to that of the middle ages. To counter such little armor you can easily use a cavalry saber which surprise surprise was used then.

I can’t even imagine how you thought I was using a strawmen argument.

The Knight and the Blast Furnace: A History of the Metallurgy of Armour in the Middle Ages & the Early Modern Period

European armour, circa 1066 to circa 1700

General reading on Napoleonic era cavalry

The simple truth is that when folks stop wearing armor head to toe and leave limbs unprotected then a saber becomes an excellent weapon for cavalry.

I am going to reply with ??? because I don’t really understand what you don’t understand.

The poleaxe has a lot more force behind an even thinner tip, I do not doubt that a strong stab might penetrate at weak spots. It might not deal that much damage but every bit helps.

Well yeah a lot of people wonder about that. On one hand it could be possible since swords were more cut orientated back then (1250 I believe) and most helmets and mail was made of iron and not steel. On the other hand they depict a lot of things which are impossible so it might just be artistic freedom.

Will do tomorrow it’s a little late now.

#87

Are you talking about the secondary edge bevels? I’d been doing some reading recently that suggests the longsword had very little, if any, secondary bevel on the edge at all, and that the bevel of the flat angled almost directly into the edge.

You DO realize that mail “mittens” didn’t actually have mail on the PALM, but would have been sewn to the back of a leather gauntlet, right?

You’d have almost no grip on the hand if the mail extended onto the palm side.

Good luck if your opponent happens to be fighting in harness, then…

…that’s nice, but Japanese swordsmanship wasn’t dealing with heavy rigid plate armor to the same extent as what was being used in Europe.

And yet you’ve been presented evidence to the contrary.

So do I. Drilling outside in the St. Louis summer at about 900% humidity tends to make one sweat. And I don’t think anyone is doubting that half-swording truly bare-handed isn’t the BEST practice – I’d prefer to have a pair of leather gauntlets (as much for protecting from minor cuts from my opponent’s sword at full extension than during half-swording) It’s the insistence that it’s altogether wrong that’s the objection.

And all of this is relevant to Talhoffer’s book on fencing how? Much of what he depicts is known to date back earlier to Liechtenauer (via Ringeck’s glosses of the merkverse), so Talhoffer himself certainly didn’t “invent” half-swording as part of harnischfechten, and that has been part of the art much longer. Furthermore, half-swording ALSO appears in the works of Fiore dei Liberi, so this is a part of the use of the longsword that extends FAR beyond just Talhoffer.

No, as Dushin says, the duels were fought in earnest, with sharp swords.

It’s certainly not something that’s missing from the fechtbuchen. The German manuals were all about constant threat (fighting from the vor, rather than the nach, defending with an attack so that you’re covering yourself and threatening your opponent), feeling (very important for winden) and footwork (the English Additional Manuscript’s flourishes specifically note footwork to an extent not found in the German or Italian manuals).

The problem I think is the conceit that there’s separate “styles” of Longsword. Based on some of my readings, I’m increasingly convinced that there was just longsword. Perhaps the Germans favored a more aggressive approach, but the techniques between the Germans, Italians, and English are the same. I’ve also seen it suggested that Fiore is the more “complete” manual, as he actually does cover more of the minutiae (whereas it seems the manuscripts descending from Liechtenauer more often focus on the meisterhau). Getting a full understanding of how the longsword was wielded would therefore mean starting with Fiore and “graduating” to Liechtenauer.

Random aside: The three English longsword manuscript fragments (Additional, Harleian, and Cottonian) include one-handed attacks (and the manuscripts ARE describing fully two-handed swords). I was actually just discussing this with my training partner this past Thursday, and even Fiore includes a means of cutting (though with two hands) that allows the same sort of extension that a one-handed sword would allow.

1 Like
#88

Yeah as far as I know only swords with a hollow grind/cross section use it extensively but besides that you don’t see it often.

Yeah and he doesn’t seem to be convinced no matter what. This discussion is slowly heading into the “9/11 inside job” level of discussion, maybe we should call it.

The guy in the video uses it from time to time. The problem for him seems to be recovering from it fast enough, although he does score a few hits.

#89

Couple things I don’t like about the longsword in that video. He’s tightroping his stance, leading to footwork that is much too linear. Also he’s not varying his guards enough. In longsword every step should involve a change in guard, while he seems to be spending most of the fight in alber and to a lesser extent pflug.

#90

Here are some things copied from the wiktenauer.com website that may help this discussion a bit.

¶ Io son posta breve la Serpentina che megliore d’le altre me tegno. A chi darò mia punta ben gli parerà lo segno. Questa punta si è forte per passare coraze e panceroni, deffendeti che voglio far la prova.

– Fiore

I am Posta Breve la Serpentina (Short Serpentine Position), I maintain myself better than the others. To whom I give my thrust, the sign will show itself well. This point is strong, for passing through cuirasses (coraze) and breastplates (panceroni). Defend yourself, that I want to try it.

– An English translation by Matt Easton and Eleonora Durban

It seems Fiore could pierce a breastplate from this position.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is some context for the sword grab:


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.

My Master, who is before, taught me that when I am crossed in the middle of the blade, I have to immediately step forward (acresser inanci) and grab his sword, to wound with a cut or a thrust. Also, I can incapacitate his leg in the way you can see drawn here by injuring him with my foot over the back of the leg or under the knee.

There is no question of the saying of the earlier Master,
And I make with intent the play that he has said.

The student which is before says that his Master, and mine, taught him this play, and for ________ I do it. There is no problem for me to do it easily.

|
|
|
|

In this discussion it seems people are quite often not understanding each other.

#91

The problem is that to both kind of swords it is referred as claymore, and this may create some confusion. Even for natives. The claymores from the source are dated between 1500AD to 1595AD, but certainly they have used the two-handed claymores up till 1689AD in larger numbers or even later in smaller numbers. In germany the use of the Spundbajonett is evident from 1669AD. The french seems have used it from 1660s, the first writing appear from 1655, but this does not describe how it was used, it could be also a knife. The french fusiliers that were raised in 1671 were the first one that were officially issued with a bayonet. The english used it for the first time in their dragoner regiments in 1672, but they were disbanded in 1674. But the Royal Fusiliers were raised in 1685. So the overlapping time of 15 - 30 years is a very small time window, for the two handed claymore vs bayonets, and the rise of the two-handed claymore. But at the Battle of Killiecrankie the plug bayonets seem to have lost against the two handed claymore. But afterwards they have learned and introduced the ring bajonet and the socket on the musket. And the first trial was in 1690.
I was very astonished that they called the basket-hilted sword a claymore. I did not knew this before i looked it up for this thread.

and

Na if kendo would have halfswording, this would be also certainly the case. Sometimes if you attack the hand you are gliding the sword on the sword, due to the parry and attack. But this could be also used against an enemy who has halfsworded. That is also the reason (hand protection) for the look of the Bihänder and the cross hilt or the basket etc etc.

Ahh that seems to be the problem. :slight_smile:
I naturally treat a chest protection like mail shirt or a chest plate as an armor, but it seems you have a higher requirement to the term armor.

The Cossacks, Russians and Tatars used still the chain mail covering their upper arms, and often the Hussars too. But they all did have one additional armor part and that was the long ‘turkish’ sleeves. So the arms were quite good protected.

Would that make the edge angle even sharper, if it is properly sharpened? Naturally after extensive use a second bevel could be necessary, because the edge would wear off and else you have to grind off a lot of steel. A Ken / To does have only one bevel.

Yes and this was one of my first statements on this topic. But what speaks against custom made full mail mittens, on the left hand for half-swording?
This?:

Yes i know this very well, but on the left hand for the halfswording you dont need the grip, you need only the hand for control of the sword, and even only the thumb and palm out of chain mail would be enough. And in a normal situation you can rely on on the pommel for the left hand.

Again. Please no strawman:

The whole context is:
but more important is that i criticise the grabbing of a sharp edge on the blade with the bare hand, in a situation where you cannot ensure that the grabbing force is not strong enough to cut your hand. Or where the push and pull forces, are not below the friction forces that you exercise by the grip force and your hand friction coefficient.
bla bla bla…
But in a fight where you sweat and the movement is fast and strong, it is very unbelievable that you can effectively do it and without a injury.
You know the necessary attention span for a discussion is more then one sentence. And false cherry picking is also a bad behavior.

But the bare-handed point is the whole time my attack/doubt point. Not the half-swording, that i don’t like, but because of the bending of the german longsword it is understandable. I have made even statements where i say that this could have been used. I do not attack the bare-handed sword fighting. I do not attack the half-swording, despite i would not do it. But once again: the bare handed half-swording, is what i attack.

The bare handed half-swording is the problem. Perhaps even Thalhoffer could have copied it, from a another source.

Partly or whole? The ‘Gerichtskampf’ and Thalhoffer (Thott) 1459:
And yes also with the ‘funny’ shields, ‘funny’ suits and some ‘funny’ swords that are quite ‘hmmm’ (but the ball would hinder a attack to the half-sworded hand or perhaps one should grab the ball to protect your hand from the sharp blade), from Thalhoffers book.
Or even perhaps unarmed opponents vs armored opponents like it is depicted.
Or even better throwing your hat (with no other weapon to disposal), to win against an armed opponent, or the ‘Gerichtskampf’ one vs two.
Or better 51r LOL / 53r LOL haha. 57r. haahahahah. Ohh god please i cant take it anymore, i will die laughing.
Look at the whole book as one whole picture, and then think it really through. Perhaps the best part is the hebrew alphabet and the arabic numbers, because it is certainly not the astrology or anatomy part.
Some of the sources say that in earlier times it was fought with ‘Stock’ and ‘Schild’, this was a blunt weapon, and even Thalhofer depicted it. Hermann Nottrap does also state, that the target of this fights was not the death, but to make a opponent not capable to fight, so he later could be judged by a court.
If i had an evidence Thalhofer stating, that the swords in a ‘Gerichtskampf’ have to be wholly sharp without a ricasso, then i would refine my opinion.

To the threat.
Mea culpa. Because i use my terminology instead of explaining what i understand under this term. I will explain this, because else it gets very easy misunderstood. You execute a threat if you have your sword before you, pointing with the tip at the opponent, and you are ready to strike, this is also a state of mind the ‘jitsu’. The threat range is then the range that you can cross with one step and one strike (issoku itto no ma). This is also the point (dead or alive) where your swords in chudan touch each other at their tips. With your ‘jitsu’(aggressive state) you try to suppress the ‘jitsu’ of your enemy to the state of ‘kyo’ (defensive state), this is the pressure (‘to attack’ seme) by the threat.
I have not seen it in european longsword fighting videos (perhaps a good and stable generation of longsword fighters has to rise, because they are just beginning to reconstruct it), but this can be found in the one handed sword fencing.
Is the ‘vor’ position like the plow guard (‘Pflug’), or the roof guard (‘Vorn Tag’) or the fools guard (Alber), in your understanding?
To the feeling.
The feeling is nice in rapier fencing, where the blades are lightly touching each other. In kendo the tsuba-zeriai is not so elaborate (you execute a push and get pushed to open up a window for a attack), but also very close like the european longsword bind.
To the footwork.
The problem is that i see videos from Longsword fighting, where people have a very lousy footwork, sometimes it looks as if they have watched to many bad ‘sword fighting’ films. Perhaps this will change, in the future. But since this is one of the basic pillars of fighting, i truly believe that a elaborated school would emphasize this.
But with your statement, other questions arise:
Why does this lack in the german and italian manuscripts? And why did only the english Manuscripts give this such a attention? Did they have better sword fighters and teachers? Did the english understood this ‘Dance of Death’ better than the german and italians? Or did the germans and italians implied, that one knows this, before one is training the longsword fighting style?

Or writing it good together into a one good compact system with a basic level and advanced level. And then looked at other martial arts to understand the flow of sword fighting, would lead to a development like in kendo (which had many years to develop to its present form).
And if the unified system is then tested in Tournaments and against other sword fighting styles, this would lead to a development of fighters on a higher level, and then it would also reveal what is good and what is not so good.

Zawisza_Charny @Fiore
1)
Yes Fiore you right about the strong side with the Luzerne hammer. And that is to me, also the only possible position to pierce through a good breastplate, it’s as old as the spear is. No much older than Adam and Eve.
2)
Ohh f… Fiore you are on my side, concerning the approach to this situation.
3)
But Fiore, your leg technique is wrong, look at the distance of your left leg to your opponent at the begining of the grab and the end of the sword strike. Your are cutting corners, that you cannot cut, a good opponent will not stand still, and let you kill him without a resistance. (Flaws of many martial arts books.)
Also a good fighter will have his knee bent, with 70% of his weight on this leg, making your front kick under the knee more questionable. But i dont know what you mean with: over the back of the leg.
A round kick to the inner side of the knee would be better, in kicking his leg off and bringing the opponent to fall, and perhaps in damaging the knee. But do not forget to rotate your hips, there comes the power from and to snap / jerk your leg to a stretch. Fiore also please look at the standard attacking position of boxers and martial artists.
Ahh and a forward kick and sword strike at the left side together are kind of odd, because of the balance that you needed for both, and the two different force direction lines. Go for just one thing, but make it count, or do it sequentially.

#92

Well if the face and limbs are not covered it is still armor just not very protective.

The Cossacks and Tatars didn’t use longswords to begin with. They would rarely come up against the western and central European heavy cavalry or heavily armored infantry. Regardless I never read an account of where Cossacks beat Hungarian style Hussars in an open battle so I assume the saber of the hussars was enough to counter them.

To be honest I also doubt Cossacks would wear mail armor a lot, they were a rather motley crew used more for skirmishing and hit and run attacks rather than facing other cavalry on the open field.

Most manuals show it.

I really think you think to much of the Katana with your criticism, that sword is a fair bit sharper.

You mean the one with the foot long spike? Yeah, no thanks i’d rather not have someone drive that through my chest.

Wrestling techniques? what’s wrong with them.

That doesn’t make a lot of sense really. What do you mean?

open the preview on this book: http://www.camden-house.com/store/viewItem.asp?idProduct=12401

and go to page 8

#93

Vor isn’t a position, it’s a concept: Fighting by taking initiative (“before”, the literal translation of vor) rather than reacting to your opponent (“after,” or nach).

Also, the longsword guards aren’t so much “set” positions as they are position one assumes to initiate a strike, or the position one ends after completing a strike, and both the English and German manuals dictate switching to a new guard every time one makes a step (this keeps the opponent guessing as to where you are open, and from where your strike will come.

It’s unclear why it isn’t discussed in detail in the other sources. The Additional Manuscript, which provides most of the information on footwork, is speculated to actually be the study notes of a student, rather than the treatise or manual of one of the masters. If correct, it means the student is writing down the footwork so he can remember how to step while practicing the flourishes (which then would apply to actual live fencing). Footwork in the German manuscripts is more implied, and only occasionally specifically noted, it’s possible they may not have written it down because it was taught separately as part of the general martial tradition, but the truth is the corpus is fragmentary enough it’s hard to say for certain.

Liechtenauer’s merkverse (and the subsequent glosses) was written specifically to “counter” the basic techniques. So his work, at least, may not have seen the need to replicate the same basics as presented in Fiore.

I agree that there ought to be a unified system assembled from the various manuscripts, unfortunately it seems there’s too many practitioners hung up on “German style” vs. “Italian style.”

1 Like
#94

I think this thread deserves a special prize for the the deepest and most informative and boring at the same time holywar on forum.

2 Likes
#95

A translation of a bit of a book by Monsieur L’Abbat “The art of fencing, or, the use of the smallsword”.

In Joining, if you cannot seize the Guard, you must the Blade, helping with your Elbow, turning the Hand to break the Blade, or take away the sword, which may be done if you are cunning and nervous, especially if the Enemy’s Wrist is in Quarte, in which there is no Danger of hurting yourself, because the Sword cannot slip thro’, and consequently, can’t cut your Fingers, as has happened to some by their Imprudence; by this Means, you have time not only to secure yourself, but also to hit your Enemy. Some People seize the Arm, but that is of no use, because the Enemy may change Hands and hit you.

2 Likes
#97

Well it seems we can now settle this issue once and for all.

#98

and another video explaining how the guy holding the sword has the leverage advantage.

#99

Matt Easton is a great guy and knows his stuff. Trained with him for a little while. He’s also been involved with translating Fiore, and there is an amazing resource here which has a vast knowledge of Fight Books, and the first of Fiore with his translation as a PDF:

#100

Bump ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°).
(characters of 20)

#101

Bump.
(20 characters)

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz