Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Edge to Flat Cuts Video Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next 
Author Message
William P




Location: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 11 Jul 2010

Posts: 1,523

PostPosted: Sat 01 Oct, 2011 8:55 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:
William,

For sword and buckler look into the I33 MS. It is very good and some great information in it. Are you specifically asking how these swords are used rather flat on edge or edge on edge, etc.? Or general use.

Since many of these MS relating to fencing/fighting are not always 100 clear interpretation is key, so if you can look with a broad eye and if you can the originals.

http://freywild.ch/i33/i33en.html

Alex,

I agree. This seems very much how I think about it.

I always wonder how commonly utilized some of the more abusive stops and blocks on edges the masters were teaching were. Of course the possible use of it is there but was the scenario these were to be used like pulling your car into the median to avoid the blazing five car pile up in front of you. You know the car is going to get trashed, likely destroyed but you have a better chance of survival than the issue before you. Some thing you knew you could do but only if necessity required it over things that would be less egregious to your sword (hence survival). Like any tool if it fails when you are relying on it you are dead, or have a higher likelihood of soon becoming so. I cannot imagine some one purposely damaging something in such a dangerous place unless motivated by little other choice. In many situations it seems there are a number of possible actions or reactions to make, which I suppose is the basis of my question.

I have no doubt that in some scenarios such techniques were employed and useful but there must be some serious thought and training to use them all where appropriate.

As to knowing your sword is of a better quality and counting on it breaking your foes weapon........ highly unlikely to my mind. The science of metallurgy was inexact at best during this time frame. I doubt many people could go into battle knowing their arms, armour and other equipment were so good they could count on such factors in their advantage.

RPM

specifically im asking how the manuscripts talk about how one shoul deal with the issue of edge blocking.
my view is that there are two halfs to this question

what works.. vs what is historical. in otherwords,

a excellent example is the controversy of the viking gambeson, we know that padded garments GREATLY inctrease the lifespan and protectiveness of maile, but we apparemtly see very little evidence of it beong used at all by the vkings. maybe they found the normally thick clotes of their cold homeland sufficient for bolstering their maile?

another example isthe absence of limb protction of ANY kind by anyone but the most elite cavalry in the byzantine ranks.]

as for swords,
i remember the late frank reinghart in hisDVD 'myths of the sword' said, 'there was no edge on edge contact, a sword was very expensive' in this he was talking about viking era blades.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Sat 01 Oct, 2011 10:42 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

William P wrote:

as for swords,
i remember the late frank reinghart in hisDVD 'myths of the sword' said, 'there was no edge on edge contact, a sword was very expensive' in this he was talking about viking era blades.


I believe you're speaking of the late Hank Reinhardt, not a "Frank Reinghart." Happy There are surviving swords with nicks to the edge. However, we don't know what created the nicks in most cases nor whether edge on edge contact was incidental/accidental or more commonplace.

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Sat 01 Oct, 2011 4:14 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

If anyone's interested in that particular part of The Myth of the Sword by Hank Reinhardt, here's the link to a portion of it on youtube. The particular discussion about edge contact starts at 4:25 or so. The link should skip you directly there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSoCcvN-4k8#t=04m25s

My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Johan Gemvik




Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: 10 Nov 2009

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Sat 01 Oct, 2011 8:46 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I cherish my copy of Hanks videos, he will be missed for a long time to come. I regret I never had the chance to meet him in person and only saw the videos and learned about him after he'd past away.

It's very interesting as an experiment to look at the videos, knowing it's an offshoot experiment from the SCA (yes, Hank even mentions "certain dukes" a clear reference to the Society social and martial circuit). He has a lot of good points and ideas that are still very much valid today, some I've incorporated in my fighting style in the SCA (with my take on Hanks deflections for instance). Other still are things I want to try, such as a sharp sword sticking in the rim of a wood shiled. I'll definitely try that when my new viking shields are finished.
Still, no one is perfect and all knowing, especially in a field like this that constantly evolves and new finds get dug up all the time.
For instance there are actually surviving swords that do exhibit clear nicks from edge contact, one good example is the Mary Rose baskethilt sword. A reason why some swords don't have such damage could also be that they're ceremonial, or new or never used status swords meant for burial, while others are tools of war being used any way a fighter can to survive and win battles.

A n interesting note about Myth of the Sword and edge damage is that Hank actually misquotes the viking Saga of Kormak the Skald. The sword does indeed nick in the saga, but from hitting a shield boss of a shield lying on the ground when he flings the sword away in a tantrum after losing the duel. Why he misquotes is quite understandable, since early translations were rather muddled and there are better and more accurare ones available today than back then.


Here's my thoughts on flat or edge blocks and edge contact. Much of this is already mentioned in the extensive old thread, though I may phrase it differently.

At full power combat anything but superb springy tempered swords risk bending when doing hard blocks with the flat. I've had friends that's happened to and it was annoying to say the least. A sword bent sideways is rather hard to keep fighting with effectively. Thrusts will be off and translate less force into the target from the awkward angle, and anything but very careful swings will also be off or impossible depening on how accute the bend is, so you're stuck with draw cuts and light cuts mostly while your oppnent isn't. That's a losing proposition unless your skill is far higher than the opponent. This type of blade damage may actually be the quickest way to render a sword unuseable in a combat situation, though the damage is rarely permanent. For practice blades it isn't a big issue, you just pause and bend it back carefully. In a life and death struggle on the other hand, your opponent wouldn't really give you pause for that if he can help it.
Parrying with the flat seems especially unadviseable with iron age up to early medieval iron core swords as they will tend to bend and not flex back in shape to a far greater degree than tempered springy all steel swords. The same is true for a traditinal made Katana which use a similar iron body or core and steel edge construction.

At full power combat, hard edge to edge contact will notch swords. How much and which gets the biggest nick depends on the respective quality of temper as well as edge geometry in the two swords meeting. I've seen blunt swords get anything from barely visible to quite deep gouges. Not much fun for your favorite blade. But does it kill you in a real fight?
If one is to believe mythbusters tests, it's impossible to cut a sword in half with another sword under human power. Though their tests were flawed on several levels it still stands to reason that hacking off your opponets sword throught he thickest depth of material won't come easily, even when nicking deep time and again. But it can ruin your favorite practice sword, espeicially if it's untempered or low-tempered like those from DelTin and such. We know there were swords this soft around historically, and softer still, as well as far harder in the edge, so this would have been a serious issue for some swordsmen while others could do this sort of contact with relative impunity.
When sharp edges dig into each other the swords stick together and won't slide along each other. That can either be a hindrance or a useful tool depending on the school/ tactic you're using. This effect is also often overlooked in steel fencing schools today, as it doesn't happen much with blunts, though some do take it into account or even experiment with it. To be fair, the effect isn't noticeable with rattan or plastic waster either and is often overlooked there too.
Ironically this effect is readily availabe in a safe way best with Latex Larp weapons if they're left dry. For those that feel bendy and far too light LARP toys are just silly, there are some manufactuers today that make them with weighted pommels and stiff cores adn thinner padding intended for HEMA use. If one was to use those with silicone treatment at the flat one could do winds and binds that stick at the edge but slide at the flat somewhat like a real sharp.

At half pace, or slow work, normal play or whichever modern or historical label one wishes to use, deflection with the flat is very effective and a fairly easy and straightforward affair. Slow speed means you'll see both cuts and feints coming a mile away and you can meet it even with a technique that demands you have your sword travel further or even moving in more planes of direction than the attacker. Not impossible to do at real speed, but far more diffcult and demanding.
At this pace bending damage to a sword hard blocking with the flat is also virtually non existent. On the other hand edge damage should also be minimal unless there's something wrong with the blade temper so it's not that simple.

At full power combat deflection with the flat work just fine and often opens the attacker wide open for counters. But these are also more likley to fail from botched timing, opponet feints and the opponent simply being too fast compared to a hard parry. Simply because it requires more timing and skill from the defender.

Skeletal strength and impact dampeing biologically built into in the hand lets you parry far harder, without losing grip or injury, with a straight on edge to edge parry. That this way of handling a sword was in use can especially clearly be seen on late rapier/sword hybrid weapons with a heavy forte and a thin peircing weak. Many historical swords also show that their Forte was not sharp. A blunt forte lends itself to hard edge-to blunt forte "edge" as well as halfswording, though the former is far more likely as most halfswording techniques seen in manuals actually grip a section in the middle of the weak/ foible or even further out just behind the COP. So a blunt forte is an indication that swords did most likely at times use the forte as a dedicated parrying section or it would be left sharp.

So conclusions then?
I think all variants discussed in the thread were used historically. I don't think there really is a right or wrong here, but rather, the quality and design of the tools at hand will dictate which is the most suitable tactic. Simply overwhelming the opponend with multiple heavy cuts and the occasional jarring hard parry with a sturdy broadsword or quality saber has its' merit, so does softer deflections and sneaky follow up with a comparatively soft iron sword (or bronze for that matter) that you have to be more careful with and binds and tricky blocks can work most effectively with a longsword or Estoc, especially coupled with grappling.
IMO, for a martial artist striving to understand and re-invent historical swordsmanship. the best way to look at this is to see that there are areas of use for all of these methods, not just the One way of doing things.

"The Dwarf sees farther than the Giant when he has the giant's shoulder to mount on" -Coleridge
View user's profile Send private message
Glennan Carnie




Location: UK
Joined: 23 Aug 2006

Posts: 289

PostPosted: Sun 02 Oct, 2011 1:19 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Johan Gemvik wrote:
For instance there are actually surviving swords that do exhibit clear nicks from edge contact, one good example is the Mary Rose baskethilt sword.


I'm not sure you can use the MR sword as an example in this argument. After 450-odd years in the silt of the Solent the blade is far too corroded to notice the (tiny) nick of an edge-to-edge contact.



The Southwark Bridge sword, held in the Royal Armouries in Leeds, is a much better example. It is in far better condition; but even here you can see marks in the edge that could be attributed to edge-to-edge contact.

View user's profile Send private message
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Sun 02 Oct, 2011 1:54 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Edge-on-edge parries were used, after all it is the most intuitive "oh, shit!" defence. But is it the way to do consciously? In most cases I don't think so. If nothing else can save you-go for whatever block you can do. But if there is a way to avoid damaging your blade-it's reasonable to do so. And about nicks. Edge can be damaged not only when you block with it, but also when your opponent does so. So if you take a man who blocks with his edge and a man who does not and make them fight with each other both swords would be nicked. So you would have 2 swords out of two that prove that edge-on-edge blocks were used and 0 swords that prove the opposite. Actually you would probably never find a sword that proves that edge-to-edge parries were not used.

Glennan, do you have a larger picture of that sword or maybe other swords with nicked blades? I am very interested in images of damaged weapons and armor since they may tell how people were actually fighting, but such photos are pretty rare.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,121

PostPosted: Mon 03 Oct, 2011 5:46 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I have worked with lots of original swords and I would reiterate what Glennan said, we have no idea where those dongs came into the blade, That said I have seen far more evidence of scuffs on the flat than the edges. One sword in the Castle Museum in York showed a huge amount of thin and light lines allover the forte. I will look for pictures of it as I think I might have a few. Regardless I could not prove where all the side scuff marks came from only muse on them.

William,

I think very few of the fighting treatises will have that kind of detail for the majority of techniques they are teaching. One of the reasons for so many varied opinions on the issue.
RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Johan Gemvik




Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: 10 Nov 2009

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Mon 03 Oct, 2011 6:42 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Glennan, you're right! The Sword I referred to is the Basket hilted sword pictured in the book Henry VIII Arms and the Man. I recalled it as the sword found with the Mary Rose, but when I re-read the section of the book it is indeed the Southwark Birdge sword and not the one found in the wreck of the Mary Rose as you say. Though they are of the same type.

The book has some very clear and crisp color photos of the Southwark blade, far clearer than the ones you posted. On both the upper mid forte and at the COP there are numerous nicks that are edge deep and U-shaped. One such nick of particular interest is the deepest one, the one at the forte. The nick has the exact same 2 mm deep U-shape that my dad once put in the edge of my uncles marine saber when they were sparring as young men (with sharps, yes. Crazy but they did), which is nowdays in my collection. I removed the nicks through re-sharpening and use the saber for tatami cutting nowdays so I can't just take some photos of them to show. At the time I didn't think much of it and just wanted to get them out. Perhaps I can find the corresponding marks on my dads mountain cavalry saber he's still got and take some pictures off that.

These nicks on the southwark sword might have been caused b y any number of things of course, but it's got exactly the look of a high tempered edged blade striking another such blade. Most people today haven't seen what that looks like, and think it'd be a deep huge cut like you see on some relatively untempered rebated modern blades from re-enactment fighting or free play -but it doesn't. Or doesn't necessarily look like that at least. They're usually 2 mm or less and stop at the bevel or near it.
Sure, it could be made from something else, but clearly it's the most logical concusion that this nick in the Southwark is from forceful edge to edge contact. Where they in the habit of striking the rims of hard steel edged drums a lot? Did helmets and armour have edges that could possiby nick a blade? -perhaps. But were they tempered edges a hard as a blade edge and physically able to make a thin and fairly deep indentation in high tempered edge steel instead of being cut by it and perhaps just depressing it slightly or turning it sideways they way I've seen on other sharps I've experimentally cut into untempered steel bars with?
I suppose the odd armour piece could be that high tempered, though it would be uncommon. However, other temperd sharp swords do leave this exact mark on a blade, every time. This sword has about 20 such nicks along the long edge, some larger than others, and a fair amount on the short edge as well.

There are no lines at the flat side of the forte visible in the photo. I've seen other swords with it though, so certainly some people did use the flat to parry with. Though if the same sword has been re-sharpened, as one would after use, probably any clear marks of any edge to edge contact would have been removed along with it, just like I did on my uncles saber. You still see vestiges of the nicks in that blade, but they're faint and you don't notice them unless you really look for them. It's far harder to remove flat parry marks on blades, so they remain visible on some swords today. At least that's one possible explanation.
I'm not saying swordsmen were only doing hacking at each other edges all day long, of course you'd try to avoid hurting your blade as much as possible, whenever possible. I just don't think it was possible even for an accomplished swordsman quite as often as some like to think today.

"The Dwarf sees farther than the Giant when he has the giant's shoulder to mount on" -Coleridge
View user's profile Send private message
Mackenzie Cosens




Location: Vancouver Canada
Joined: 08 Aug 2007

Posts: 238

PostPosted: Mon 03 Oct, 2011 12:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

William P wrote:
ok... yes im ressurecting THIS old thread which seemed to get as tense as the cuban missile crisis

but i have a genuine qestion

most of this topic is on pretty much only ONE tweapons use, the 2 handed sword and its usage but what does the literature say on OTHER weapons
messer?
ageorge silver broadsword (prety much arming sword or side sword

highliand broadsword?

sword and buckler?


viking style sword and shield?

polish sabre fencing?

any variety of chinese indian or arabian techniques?


i am in particular keen to know about how arming sword in absence of shields or sidearms were used


Synopsis: Study Dr. Forgeng 2006 translation of Meyer's The Art of Combat and you can get a part answer to your question.

I think I am safe in saying that earlier manuals don't tell us, but I am reading Meyer's The Art of Combat translation by Dr. J.L. Forgeng US ISBN: 1-4039-7092-0 UK ISBN-13 978-1-85367-643-7, ISBN-10 1-85367-643-8 and it seems to have some answers to your question. It is an interesting book because it talks about longsword, dusack, and rapier at a transitional time when these new fangled and foreign rapiers are starting to be used in Germany and the longsword has become a sport form but longsword still forms the bases for German fencing.

I just started to read the longsword section in which he gives a series of devices(forms, plays or if you prefer solutions) to various incidents in the use of the sword. These devices are very specific saying things such as,
Quote:
... and he cuts in the mean time against your left at your head, then spring around well out from his cut towards his left somewhat to him and strike with your outside flat against his incoming stroke ...
If such specific devices continue for the devices in dusack and rapier (note: I am told the rapier section has more akin to Marozzo then Capo Ferro that is to say it is more Arming sword then classic 17 C rapier.) and you study the text you can form your own opinion based on the works of a late 16th Century German master.

mackenzie
View user's profile Send private message
William P




Location: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 11 Jul 2010

Posts: 1,523

PostPosted: Mon 03 Oct, 2011 9:02 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

regarding the abilityof the blades flat to withstand pressures, i have a few anecdotes to report

the first is my dao, it is built mostly for non contact practice, i.e wushu the foible is quite thin and the forte area (about half and half each, of the blade length) and i flubbed a cutto a thin branch, there was an almightly ear raking noise that sounded like someone hit a cymbal particularly hard, and the blade now has a nasty set to it, there is a very clear line where the sword is bent. of course while we disagree as to the hits of flat or edge, we CAN i think all agree that you never block with the feeble, or the top half of the blade length,

at the same note, as far as i know, i remember reading online, i cannont for the life of me remember the URL right now, but suffice to say the person stated that the duel steel construction of a katana makes iot actually LESS suited to striking the flat, we all have heard of the katanas legendarily hard edge section, which is the why theres so many mythes about iits cutting power, but ive also heard it said that the back and sides made of less heavily tempered, softer steels for the sole purpose of supporting that superhard cutting edge, will respond badly to impacts, and potentially bend, also its noticable that in sparring, kenjutsu fighters dont seem to actively block with the edge,

thirdly regarding blocking and bracing your arms, in my groups viking reenactment, we spend a huge majority of the time using the shield to block. but i have been told that when stopping a blade with mine, the flat isnt a good idea, because when doing an upper block with the edge, your wrist, and arm are all in alignment, meaning you can better resist the blow.

lastly, i was debating someone on the comments of a showing clements did for a crowd, challenging a persons claims that clements has it wrong. he notified me he trained longsword, rapier etc, and said that fiore states at one point "block on the edge of thine rapier' or something like that...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Mon 03 Oct, 2011 11:44 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Johan Gemvik wrote:

One such nick of particular interest is the deepest one, the one at the forte. The nick has the exact same 2 mm deep U-shape that my dad once put in the edge of my uncles marine saber when they were sparring as young men


2 mm seems to be too little. If the metal is soft (well, modern bouting blunts are around 50 HRC but let's call them soft) nicks will be much deeper than that. If the metal is hard it will most likely crack forming a nick of irregular, jagged form. Sword with a lot of shallow nicks looks very suspicious to me. Looks just as if somebody was sparring with it with half force (just like your dad and uncle did I suppose, I don't think they were actually trying to kill each other). Also we don't know how hard the sword is. It may well be around 40-45 HRC, which makes a good spring (thus very resilient sword that can be sharpened with a file) but will get nicks is struck against steel armor, especially hardened armor.

So many nicks also remind me of one two-handed messer I once saw in a local museum. Its edge literally looked like a saw. This weapon was totally useless for cutting. I remember myself thinking: "either somebody was trying to fight with it without having any skill, or it is a fake that was deliberately made to look as if it saw battle".

Aslo about grinding away deep nicks. Grind away 2 millimeters of the blade a couple of times and it will be very noticeable, jut like on some tulwars I have seen.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Steven Reich




Location: Arlington, VA
Joined: 28 Oct 2003

Posts: 237

PostPosted: Tue 04 Oct, 2011 6:03 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

For my part, I tend to follow the instructions in the treatises. While I realize that not all authors are explicit, I'm lucky in that mine (the 16th century Bolognese authors) are pretty clear in their descriptions of techniques. As such, sometimes I will "catch the blow on my edge" and other times it will be much more oblique. Sometimes it might be a static parry and at others, a deflecting strike. In any case, I tend not to fixate on edge-vs-flat as the specific action and relative position of the swords will dictate what happens (i.e. how the swords meet).

Steve

Founder of NoVA-Assalto, an affiliate of the HEMA Alliance
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Johan Gemvik




Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: 10 Nov 2009

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Tue 04 Oct, 2011 9:24 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Aleksei, you do realise if somebody was sparring semi lightly with the sword in that fashion it was probably military drill of some kind. As in military procedure, which should indicate it followed the contemporary view on proper swordsmanship. Conjecture certainly, but by the subjects very nature, so is everything else posted here. Wink

The nicks being 2 mm was just a rough estimate from eye, not an absolute measure. Could be deeper in some cases and some are certainly more shallow.
I certainly hope my dad and Uncle were's seriously trying to hurt each other, though I've heard of this one time one was chasing the other with an axe and hacking down a bathroom door to get to the other at another time. Having a twin brother myself I know what sibling rivalry can be like at times, though my dad made us promise as kids never ever to take a sword or axe to each other no matter how angry we got. Which we've kept to this day.

Having struck sharps together IRL with other well tempered swords, with deadly force but simply for purely scietific curiosity and testing purposes, I know what it looks like. It could go fairly deep if a sword is soft, but often it doesn't if both blades are of equal temper and are high tempered for a sword, around HRC 45-50 in the edge. Some simple tests, though with no great amount of force can be seen in some reviews on the SBG forum, the tinly nicks from striking edges together by a single weilder is an indication. Double the force for an actual powerful swing, you'll get double the total depth penetration into the edges, that results in a 50% nick depth increas to each blade, each temper being equal. Still not very deep. The really deep ones you saw on that sword is probably from both combatants, or trainees, striking each others blade simultaneously, that produces the most force by far and I've seen it both seriously nick and break apart seemingly solid swords.

Damage to properly thick edged and rounded rebated spring steel tempered blades happen over extended heavy use and over time, striking the "edge" to another edge may make a small intendtation, but hardly a gouge. There are lots of soft rebated swords out there though, softer than most seem to realise and they cn gouge pretty easily. That can give a false perception of a real blades' durability.

Temper in armour was rarely, if ever at 50 HRC or even half that. Even the late 16th century plate armour simply didn't usually have good enough quality steel to support it without becoming brittle. Most armour still around today wouldn't even register on the Rockwell scale, but sure, some few do. Perhaps a duke or king might have that quality steel in his plate, but most ordinalry soldiers would have fairly soft steel or even iron hardly able to nick a blade sharply and deeply. What they could do was bend sideways or indent the edge to a shallow half moon shape or if the blade was brittle or cracked previosly it could break it half when struck at uncommonly solid unyeilding armour. It could be plenty thick after all.

"The Dwarf sees farther than the Giant when he has the giant's shoulder to mount on" -Coleridge
View user's profile Send private message
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Tue 04 Oct, 2011 11:12 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I fight with steel blunts twice a week so believe me, I do know how deep a sword would be nicked if struck edge-to-edge with enough force. Most swords we have are around 50 HRC. At that hardness removing the nicks with a steel file is very problematic unless the file is of best quality and is absolutely new. Here is what I would expect to see if these were full-force blows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8UeKcsE3Nw. It would get considerably worse if both opponents were striking at the same time. Even properly heat treated blunt swords with 3mm edge get nicks up to 3 mm deep this way. Even if the nicks on the sword are not 2 but 4 mm deep they would still indicate that either the blows were weak or the sword has a very beefy edge (thus not very good for cutting) or is considerably harder then the sword it faced. As you can see, there are many possibilities. It is possible that this sword was nicked in a real battle, but it is also possible that it was not, so no solid proof for either standpoint here.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mackenzie Cosens




Location: Vancouver Canada
Joined: 08 Aug 2007

Posts: 238

PostPosted: Wed 05 Oct, 2011 9:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mackenzie Cosens wrote:
William P wrote:
ok... yes im ressurecting THIS old thread which seemed to get as tense as the cuban missile crisis

but i have a genuine qestion

most of this topic is on pretty much only ONE tweapons use, the 2 handed sword and its usage but what does the literature say on OTHER weapons
messer?
ageorge silver broadsword (prety much arming sword or side sword

highliand broadsword?

sword and buckler?


viking style sword and shield?

polish sabre fencing?

any variety of chinese indian or arabian techniques?


i am in particular keen to know about how arming sword in absence of shields or sidearms were used


Synopsis: Study Dr. Forgeng 2006 translation of Meyer's The Art of Combat and you can get a part answer to your question.

I think I am safe in saying that earlier manuals don't tell us, but I am reading Meyer's The Art of Combat translation by Dr. J.L. Forgeng US ISBN: 1-4039-7092-0 UK ISBN-13 978-1-85367-643-7, ISBN-10 1-85367-643-8 and it seems to have some answers to your question. It is an interesting book because it talks about longsword, dusack, and rapier at a transitional time when these new fangled and foreign rapiers are starting to be used in Germany and the longsword has become a sport form but longsword still forms the bases for German fencing.

...

mackenzie


Ok, I will read ahead a little.

With Meyer don't think 17th C rapier like Fabris and Capo Ferro think 16th C Bolognese Cut and Thrust like Manciolino and Marozzo at least thats my impression so far.


Synopsis: It appears to me that Meyer says that with a rapier sometimes you use the flat and sometimes you edge.


From the rapier section of Art of Combat Meyer, 1570 translation J.L. Forgeng

Quote:
Concerning Parring and how many forms of it are particular used in the rapier compared to other weapons

Seven types of parrying are found here, called setting off, going through, suppressing, hanging, barring and sending out or away with upright and with hanging blade
p189 Meyer translation Forgeng

Now here are some exerts of what Meyer associated with parring with the rapier

case that uses the long edge
Quote:
[Setting OFF (Absetzen) ]
Setting off is when, from one of the four guards you turn the long edge against his weapon and turn into Longpoint
p190 Meyer translation Forgeng

case that uses the long edge
Quote:
Suppressing [Dempffen]
Suppressing is derived from the High Cut, for that is essentially what it is All other cuts can be suppressed and countered with this High cut in the following way:
Position yourself in the low guard on the right; when he cuts at your left from his right from below or above, then note when he extends his arm for the stroke, and raise your weapon at the same time as him yet such that as you raise your blade extend up away from you and your hilt down towards you. With all this step double out from his cut towards his left and cut form above at his right following the vertical line with the long edge and lowered hilt along the a broad step forward on you right foot. Thus you hit on the forte of his blade ...
p190 Meyer translation Forgeng

a case that uses the flat
Quote:
Hanging [ verhengen]
Hanging is the type of parrying where you send your hilt about your face with your arms extended forward and your blade hangs towards the ground and you put off his thrusts and strokes with your flat to both sides...
p191 Meyer translation Forgeng

a case that uses the short or false edge
Quote:
Taking out with the Short Edge [AuBnemen mit halber Schneid] (apology for the improper use of B)
Position yourself in the Low Guard on the left like the Change, so that the short edge stands towards your opponent. If your opponent thrust towards your face, then take it out with the short edge stroingly by slashing form your left up towards your right, so that your blade shoots back around your head into right Ox. From there thrust at his chest; and with this thrust turn your long edge down and back into the left Low Guard. From there take out again as before.

As you now have learn to take out upwards with the short edge, so you can also strike out upwards with the long edge and with the flat; and this can be done from both low postures
p191 Meyer translation Forgeng

I like this one because the last paragraph says it all: ... learn to take out upwards with the short edge, so you can also strike out upwards with the long edge and with the flat;

This last section is not specifically from Meyer's discussion on parring but from "The Second Part of Combat with Rapier" which he says he "... intends to describe the practice in itself and how you should carry it out against your opponent in the work, ..."

a case for using the long edge
Quote:
How you shall catch a cut he sends at you from his right, and quickly thrust straight at his left
In the Onset, position yourself in the Straight Parring, as shown by the solitary middle figure in Image F; approach him thus with extended and firm parring, If he cuts or thrust from his right diagonally towards your left, then turn your long edge and hilt up against his incoming cut or thrust; and as you thus parry, step out sideways from his thrust or cut with your rear left foot behind your right towards your opponent's left and with this stepping out that you have been taught , catch his blade upon your forte near your hilt. Just as the blade connects int the bind, then step with your right foot to him towards his left side and at the same time as you step forth, thrust on his blade (or off of it straight in before your) at his face, into high longpoint. As soon as the thrust has hit or is competed, then turn your long edge back against his blade and pull back into the previous parring; with this protect yourself until you see your opportunity for an other device.
p195 Meyer translation Forgeng

my apology for any errors or omissions.

Looks like there is ton of good stuff in Meyer,
I really should study and train more.
mackenzie
View user's profile Send private message
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Wed 05 Oct, 2011 11:36 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Very interesting instructions. I haven't trained with a rapier so I may be wrong, but:

Setting off is using your edge to displace incoming blade, not stop it. No solid block here.

I may be wrong, but I think that suppressing should be executed by striking flat of the incoming blade with the edge. Similar to using zornhau to displace a cut from above. Again no solid edge-to-edge block. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Hanging clearly is said to be performed with a flat, and for a good reason. If executed with an edge the edge will be left completely dull because incoming blade slides along it.

Short edge is used to displace the incoming blade, not stop it. A technique I often use with a longsword and messer (though I usually don't end in the ox guard). No solid block here.

Now the last passage clearly says to turn the long edge against opponent's blade. But I would like to see this technique used against a strong cut (while stepping to the right, that is away from the cut, with the left foot behind the right foot). The position itself seems to be pretty unstable, and stepping to the right while moving the sword to the left would mean that the sword would almost remain in place. If the block is made with the blade, it will be swung to the right by the force of the blow. One would have to let the incoming blade slide towards the hilt to prevent it, but then it would again mean that there is no solid edge-to-edge block.

I wonder if there are any videos of these techniques on youtube. Would like to see them.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Steven Reich




Location: Arlington, VA
Joined: 28 Oct 2003

Posts: 237

PostPosted: Thu 06 Oct, 2011 6:09 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Aleksei Sosnovski wrote:
Hanging clearly is said to be performed with a flat, and for a good reason. If executed with an edge the edge will be left completely dull because incoming blade slides along it.

If this whole thread has gotten back to a matter of "were there ever instructions for edge-on-edge blocks?" Then the answer is a clear "yes". Numerous examples exist in the Bolognese texts but perhaps the clearest is that described by Viggiani where he discusses using a rising riverso against the opponent's downward cut. He says something to the effect of "this is the way it is most commonly taught" and also talks about the possible effect of breaking the opponent's sword since you will be catching the edge of his debole on the edge of your forte.

Steve

Founder of NoVA-Assalto, an affiliate of the HEMA Alliance
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Thu 06 Oct, 2011 6:28 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

This technique is similar in form but completely different in goal from "hanging" as I understand it (stopping the incoming blade instead of deflecting it). Could you please post a translation of the technique description rather then your interpretation? Not that I want to argue, I am genuinely interested and simply want to avoid looking at things through a prism of other person's mind.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Steven Reich




Location: Arlington, VA
Joined: 28 Oct 2003

Posts: 237

PostPosted: Thu 06 Oct, 2011 10:50 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Aleksei Sosnovski wrote:
This technique is similar in form but completely different in goal from "hanging" as I understand it (stopping the incoming blade instead of deflecting it). Could you please post a translation of the technique description rather then your interpretation? Not that I want to argue, I am genuinely interested and simply want to avoid looking at things through a prism of other person's mind.

It's in Viggiani in book 3; what I posted was a paraphrase. If you do a search here or on SFI you'll find discussion of the action in some of the previous flat vs. edge debates. In any case, I don't have my sources here at work and probably won't have time until next week.

I don't know what "hanging" is, so I don't know if it is similar or not.

Steve

Founder of NoVA-Assalto, an affiliate of the HEMA Alliance
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mackenzie Cosens




Location: Vancouver Canada
Joined: 08 Aug 2007

Posts: 238

PostPosted: Thu 06 Oct, 2011 12:10 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Aleksei Sosnovski wrote:
Very interesting instructions. I haven't trained with a rapier so I may be wrong, but:

Setting off is using your edge to displace incoming blade, not stop it. No solid block here.

I may be wrong, but I think that suppressing should be executed by striking flat of the incoming blade with the edge. Similar to using zornhau to displace a cut from above. Again no solid edge-to-edge block. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Hanging clearly is said to be performed with a flat, and for a good reason. If executed with an edge the edge will be left completely dull because incoming blade slides along it.

Short edge is used to displace the incoming blade, not stop it. A technique I often use with a longsword and messer (though I usually don't end in the ox guard). No solid block here.

Now the last passage clearly says to turn the long edge against opponent's blade. But I would like to see this technique used against a strong cut (while stepping to the right, that is away from the cut, with the left foot behind the right foot). The position itself seems to be pretty unstable, and stepping to the right while moving the sword to the left would mean that the sword would almost remain in place. If the block is made with the blade, it will be swung to the right by the force of the blow. One would have to let the incoming blade slide towards the hilt to prevent it, but then it would again mean that there is no solid edge-to-edge block.

I wonder if there are any videos of these techniques on youtube. Would like to see them.



William P asks " ... most of this topic is on pretty much only ONE tweapons use, the 2 handed sword and its usage but what does the literature say on OTHER weapons " and Meyer talks a lot about weapons other then the longsword worth a read.

One of the things I like about Meyer is that when he want you to use a flat he tells you to use a flat and when he wants you to use and edge he tells you to use the edge and what I wrote is a close a transcription I could do from Dr. Forgeng's 2006 translation of Meyer's The Art of Combat, as I could. So when you talk about suppressing and you say its done with the flat I am not saying you wrong, I am saying that Meyer in his section on rapier says do it this way "..cut form(sp) above at his right following the vertical line with the long edge and lowered hilt along the a broad step forward on you right foot. Thus you hit on the forte of his blade ... ". You may have other sources that say use the flat to suppress perhaps even in other sections Meyer's book he says use the flat, but that is not what is said in this section.


I need to go back to work, this too much fun and too distracting. Happy

Quote:
Katana's are the bestest swords EVER!
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Edge to Flat Cuts Video
Page 6 of 9 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
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