| Author |
Message |
Jean Thibodeau
|
 Posted: Mon 30 Oct, 2006 6:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
From someone who doesn't have any riding experience my conclusions are that horses used mostly as a means of transport only and horses who are part of a fighting system, as the stronger but hopefully as the controlled not controlling partner, are a whole different breed of horse and horse training and rider competence.
As far as I know Gordon was almost born on a horse so I would take his opinion as almost gospel.  
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
  |
 |
|
Peter Bosman
|
| Posted: Mon 30 Oct, 2006 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gordon Frye wrote: | but I can see the purpose for it when considering the use of stallions in combat situations.
|
Buenas Gordon,
well, dificult. The closest I get to a melee is the chaos of 60-100 dronken horsemen during carreras de cinta. I ride unbridled then too and the biggest worry is my horses taking action.
I have no doubt that my stallion will work WITH me no matter what. Again, a real battle luckily is way beyond my experience and ambition. In a more peacefull situation however he did very actively defend me when I fell once. I was ok really, just winded but it would have been impossible to reach me.
Whatever the history, nowadays we have no arguments not to think of the horse
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon Frye
|
| Posted: Tue 31 Oct, 2006 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jean;
You, Sir, are far too kind. Or full of it, I'm not sure which. BTW, I can assert that I wasn't born on horseback, but rather in an elevator. 
Peter, I agree completely, in that today we must think of the horse, since we don't have to use them as weapons of war anymore! But it certainly sounds like you have way too much fun there in sunny Andalusia anyway! 
Cheers!
Gordon
"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
|
|
  |
|
|
Martin Wilkinson
|
| Posted: Tue 31 Oct, 2006 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gordon Frye wrote: | | George Hill wrote: | | Ian Evans wrote: | | To be honest, the few pictures that I've seen that do show the back of someone wearing a belt and hanger all show the dagger simply stuck thro the belt with the hilt pointing towards the right side of the body and the right hand.... |
Pardon, but as a dagger of this type is usually understood to be used in conjunction with the sword, if it is pointing to the right hand, how do you get it out with the left when you have sword in hand? |
Ian is indeed correct, all of the illustrations and paintings of the period show the dagger stuffed into the belt at the small of the back, and angled to the RIGHT side of the body. As I understand it, the purpose is to allow immediate access to a weapon, even though the smaller of the two carried, for a fast reaction to a threat and with the strong hand. Once in position to be used defensively, the rapier may be removed (usually along with the scabbard, at least in a civilian context) and drawn, (generally after shifting hands with the dagger, I would immagine). If you've ever tried to do a "fast draw" with a rapier, you'll understand just how awkward such a move can be, thus the necessity for a quicker weapon to be at hand.
I hope I explained that properly...
Cheers!
Gordon |
| J. Mark Bertrand wrote: | At close quarters, the dagger is a more effective weapon than the sword. Have you ever wondered why swordsmen wore their daggers at the small of their backs, with the hilt facing to the right? If the dagger was intended for the left hand, why not turn the hilt so it could be grasped behind the back, rather than forcing the left hand to reach across the body to grab it? The answer is simple. If a man is standing six feet in front of you with a dagger in his hand, you cannot draw your sword. If you try, he will check your forearm and prevent the draw, or ignore you entirely and start stabbing. But if you fall back a pace and fend with your left hand, your right can easily grab the dagger hilt (which is located behind the hip, the preferred location of handguns today) and draw it with the standard “icepick” grip of the day. Now it goes without saying that if a man is coming at you with his dagger drawn, there is no question of a polite duel settling things!
Not long ago, John Clements and I had an interesting conversation. We were looking at galleys from Dr. Sydney Anglo’s book The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe, and John pointed out that Dr. Anglo had remarked upon something he had long wondered about: why the Renaissance treatises don’t spend much time on drawing the sword. After all, when I studied the pistol, the first thing I was taught was a quick way to bring the weapon into action from its holster. Presumably the Renaissance masters developed similar techniques to aid their students in the fight, but few of them—the thorough, if idiosyncratic, Thibault being one—actually teach a “fast draw” technique. In Japanese swordsmanship, of course, the draw is so important that the art of iaito deals with almost nothing else. So why are the Western masters largely silent? Perhaps because they were operating with the assumptions of the duel in mind, or perhaps because in a situation that called for the “fast draw” they advised their students to reach for the dagger….
|
Taken from http://www.thearma.org/essays/Tactical.htm
"A bullet you see may go anywhere, but steel's, almost bound to go somewhere."
Schola Gladiatoria
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Bosman
|
| Posted: Tue 31 Oct, 2006 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | As far as I know Gordon was almost born on a horse so I would take his opinion as almost gospel. |
If that could only be true Jean, if only. Gordon sounds like he has learned from experience but that has all to with his being him, not at all with the years he may have spent with horses. There are too many people in horses doing things like they were always done just because they were, just like the infamous wet apes.
The saddest thing is that before things were always done this way they were done in other ways.
The truism is that one needs to improve ones self to better ones horse. Unfortunately it seems to be a prerequisite to be near illiterate to be able to ride a horse and the thinking rider who was once the goal in the Spanish Riding school forgotten.
Another truism is that there is always more, ALWAYS.
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon Frye
|
| Posted: Tue 31 Oct, 2006 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Martin;
Thanks for that quote, it was stated far better than I could manage!
Peter;
I shall take what you said to mean pretty much that you can always learn more, and that thinking about how, and why, things are or were done in a certain way is far better than just doing it "Because that's how it's always been done". Good to know how it's always been done, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's the best way to do it.
Of course, I've also often encountered the problem of people trying to reinvent the wheel, and then discovering that "The way it's always been done" was, in fact, the best way to do it after all.
In any event, I still happily take riding lessons, as equitation is something that can always be improved upon, no matter how advanced the student.
Cheers!
Gordon
"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wilkinson
|
| Posted: Tue 31 Oct, 2006 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
No problem Gordon, having read that myself, that's always in my mindset.
Now whenever i wear a dagger i mak sure that it's easily drawable with my right hand.
I think, there's an example in there, but i can't find it.
Basically you're in a tavern, sitting on at a table in the corner, get up to get a new drink, turn to walk towards the bar, there's a man with a dagger drawn staring straight at you, six feet away, do you a) draw you sword and have him be too close for it to be much good, or b) draw your dagger and stand a fighting chance. And of course you want your dagger to be easily accesible by your strong hand. So having the hilt facing right makes sense to me.
For those curious, you just reach round with the left hand, and draw the dagger like you would a sword normally, or you perform a double draw...
"A bullet you see may go anywhere, but steel's, almost bound to go somewhere."
Schola Gladiatoria
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon Frye
|
| Posted: Tue 31 Oct, 2006 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Martin Wilkinson wrote: | | Basically you're in a tavern, sitting on at a table in the corner, get up to get a new drink, turn to walk towards the bar, there's a man with a dagger drawn staring straight at you, six feet away, do you a) draw you sword and have him be too close for it to be much good, or b) draw your dagger and stand a fighting chance. And of course you want your dagger to be easily accesible by your strong hand. So having the hilt facing right makes sense to me. |
Just the sort of example I was thinking of. Thanks!
Cheers!
Gordon
"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Bosman
|
| Posted: Wed 01 Nov, 2006 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gordon Frye wrote: | Of course, I've also often encountered the problem of people trying to reinvent the wheel, and then discovering that "The way it's always been done" was, in fact, the best way to do it after all.
|
Obviousy changing because of it is just as senseless as sticking with things because of that.
The tricky thing is that the more you learn the more you also change. In this you are not alone as more circumstances change.
In fact you can say that the only constant and certainty is change. Thus evaluation should be continuous too.
This can appear both unsetlling and bothersome but that is just an attitude. Change as a certainty can be made to feel secure too as however bad things may appear, this too will change
Evaluation can also be quite funny when you find you have been doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. Then nobody is the worse for your mistake(s) or ignorance and the lesson was for free.
It also is liberating in a sense as you can be certain you will always have ample opportunity for improvement and it is no use crying over spilt milk.
Riding a horse has a lot to do with Zen. Both the beginning pupil and teacher are awed by what there is still to be learned.
I am grappling with the concepts of Dom Duarte about this and for myself have reorganised his approach into Will, Possibilties and Knowledge. Interesting stuff, at least to me it is.
As to the dagger the answer has been given and is about the main purpose of the dagger. When mounted it is of little importance where or how it is carried as long as it is out of the way.
Same thing with the rapier. The musketeer after all was not given this name because of the sharp stick was he?!
When discussing cavalry and the tools it is as mentioned earlier paramount to understand all circumstances to be able to give a sensible answer as to the how and why.
Also, sometimes, especially late renaissance and later, it may be down to simple army regulations based on a mean average, something outdated or even a misconception in the minds of the powers that be.
This brings us back to present day horse riding as several widely accepted ways of doing things have forgotten roots in now obsolete cavalry regulations.
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Nov, 2006 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attached is a photo of a rapier scabbard in a hanger attached to a belt. Note that the dagger scabbard is also attached to the belt. This type of attachment is generally created from a metal loop attached to the throat of the dagger scabbard: a system I've seen in place on examples at the Met and elsewhere. It also happens to be the method that A&A uses on their "fancy" dagger scabbard.
 Attachment: 88.65 KB
Rapier and dagger suspension
Italian, Milan (?), Circa 1570
Now located in Vienna
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
 |
|
|
D. Raleigh
|
| Posted: Sun 26 May, 2019 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see no one has opined here for over twelve years; maybe no one will read my opinion but here it is:
it's your kit; deploy it about your person as you see fit. And while none of us - I hope! - spend much time in places where defending your life with sword and dagger is likely; still it's fun to think about the particulars.
So here's my take on it: I have never understood the notion of carrying a dagger in the small of your back, hilt facing to the right if using it to handle an emergency is a possibility. It's only available to one hand which might be incapacitated, and it's slow. And even then it requires you to place your shoulder in a disadvantageous position in order to draw.
I don't like it in the small of the back, hilt facing to the left much better.
So I wear mine at the 3 o'clock position; just where I wear my pistol when I have one, and with the hilt forward.
Let's take three possibilities in which I might have to draw it:
1. I have all the time and space in the world to draw my sword with my right hand and my dagger with my left. It's easy. Maybe I won't even have to fight.
2. I have time but not enough space for the sword; I turn my hand palm-outward and draw the dagger, point forward.
3. I was totally surprised by someone who is way too close, way too soon; I draw the dagger with my right hand, point downward and, while grasping and arresting with my left hand I make a full-speed bloody mess of whatever is close, icepick-style, with the dagger.
Just my take on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic