| Author |
Message |
|
Ruel A. Macaraeg
|
 Posted: Tue 02 Nov, 2004 2:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | As fantasticly and almost rediculously fast as some of them are moving (assuming the video has not been sped up), I have to wonder whether the training weapons acurately reflect weapons of war. Are we watching what amounts to the Indian equivalent of Wushu, or are the practicioners in the clips simply the creme de la creme? |
* Hoping not to sound disparaging toward the tradition in which Mike trains, I must echo David's sentiments. I've seen these and some other Gatka/Shastar Vidya sparring clips before, and the weapons employed don't seem to reflect the weights of most talwar. Remember --especially between the 17-18c. -- talwar had to contend with plate, mail, and scale armor, and thin, narrow blades like the ones evidently shown (as well as the first example I posted) would not be of great service in the field.
We must also consider that the historic record shows some details that are difficult to reconcile with the present methods.
1. Talwar are regularly shown in a high drawn-back guard indicating a powerful strike employing a full range of body motion, not the 'all in front' techniques here.
2. These strikes are well-recorded in both literature and art as having devastating impact -- slicing torsos, etc. at a single stroke. I don't see how that kind of power can be generated with the short-arm techniques shown.
3. Even though the buckler-sized dhal seems to have become common during the 19thc., artwork shows that larger targe-sized dhal were the norm in earlier times, and of course much of any shieldwork seems to have been disregarded in cavalry use of the talwar. The matter of fencing with the talwar while mounted is still an open issue.
* Viking swords cannot be directly compared to talwars because with the former one's wrist can still straddle the pommel, whereas in the latter it can't.
|
|
    |
 |
Mike Stillwell
|
| Posted: Wed 03 Nov, 2004 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ruel A. Macaraeg wrote: | | Quote: | | As fantasticly and almost rediculously fast as some of them are moving (assuming the video has not been sped up), I have to wonder whether the training weapons acurately reflect weapons of war. Are we watching what amounts to the Indian equivalent of Wushu, or are the practicioners in the clips simply the creme de la creme? |
* Hoping not to sound disparaging toward the tradition in which Mike trains, I must echo David's sentiments. I've seen these and some other Gatka/Shastar Vidya sparring clips before, and the weapons employed don't seem to reflect the weights of most talwar. Remember --especially between the 17-18c. -- talwar had to contend with plate, mail, and scale armor, and thin, narrow blades like the ones evidently shown (as well as the first example I posted) would not be of great service in the field.
We must also consider that the historic record shows some details that are difficult to reconcile with the present methods.
1. Talwar are regularly shown in a high drawn-back guard indicating a powerful strike employing a full range of body motion, not the 'all in front' techniques here.
2. These strikes are well-recorded in both literature and art as having devastating impact -- slicing torsos, etc. at a single stroke. I don't see how that kind of power can be generated with the short-arm techniques shown.
3. Even though the buckler-sized dhal seems to have become common during the 19thc., artwork shows that larger targe-sized dhal were the norm in earlier times, and of course much of any shieldwork seems to have been disregarded in cavalry use of the talwar. The matter of fencing with the talwar while mounted is still an open issue.
* Viking swords cannot be directly compared to talwars because with the former one's wrist can still straddle the pommel, whereas in the latter it can't. |
These seem very good points, Ruel, and I believe that your intention to address them seem a good basis to help us to get closer to the truth. You don't sound disparaging but questioning. .
As a beginner I can't answer your points, only try and add some information which I hope is of use in getting closer to what the question is. I would seriously suggest contacting your nearest Sikh community and speaking/visiting with them to get some accurate answers.
There's a lot of different swords, some I'm sure more suited to some situations than others. Considering battles, I find fighting with a training stick for three minutes is about my limit, so I would wish a light sword if at all possible as a common foot-soldier in an engagement. And yet I'm sure that cavalry or other sorts of soldier might have other priorities, so I would be interested to know more about this. I know that the swords in the Wallace show a great diversity and that as India itself is such a big place that there are examples of every sort of weapon imaginable. The swords people use in the cllips will be modern repro or antique swords from India - whatever people ca get hold of for the purpose and, as I say, often antique blades that have been rehilted over the years. No-one would think to have anything specially made for the purpose.
Here's something that is helpful to me, though more of an observation of my own rather than related to what I've been taught. In the various clips you have available, try seeing the swordsman as using the single sword, or stick, or sword and shield to define a sphere. It is the sphere which is moved in relation to the body. In a single duel, and particularly if I was fighting a fencer, I would keep the sphere which is my attack and defence in front of me. But the bigger I allow my sphere to get, the more powerful the blows until, in a battlefield situation with possible threats on all sides, and keeping my sword very close to my body and within the curve of it, I myself am the centre of the sphere, or of a number of possible spheres, and the use of footwork to change position and facing [a major feature of this style] adds even more power.
Having said that, if I were to say this to the people I train with they would not look at things in this way at all - it is something you DO for them, and that you learn by doing, not something you discuss.
Seeing a full-blown engagement with steel sword and shield I am not in the least surprised at the reports of arms. legs and torsos being cleaved. I am always amazed at how few serious injuries there usually are in training.
.
With the double sword, the interesting bit isn't so much how fast the swordsman can twirl it as what happens when he changes from one sort of twirl to another, particularly when footwork is involved. I can only suggest looking there, in part,. for the power for the cuts you mentioned. And you can imagine how strong a person's wrists and forearms become through these practice styles, and how quick at making an up-cut from the hip in battle, for instance.
Again not trying to answer your question, but additionalobservations - yes, if I was riding towards someone I'd hold the sword in a high drawn back guard. I would be fascinating to find out more about using Indian shield and sword on horseback. I think the short-arm techniques with a shield would be most useful [and instinctive to an Indian warrior] in that situation after the first blow, but I have no information on this. As you say, an open issue.The use of a shield was, I believe, so generally common that parrying with the sword would not usually be something an average warrior would have much expertise it - but this is of course a generalisation.
Can't help about the shield - We use small training shields to develop accuracy - or about Viking swords I am not setting myself up as an 'authority' here, just an interested enquirer like yourself. I wish you luck in finding the answers you seek. As a beginner, and as an interested Westerner, I don't have the answers, and am not attached to proving 'my' ideas about all this, but I am very interested in finding the answers to the questions and points you raise. Please keep in touch with any thoughts or ideas you may have.
Best
Mike
Do you now know what beauty is for?
And have you changed your life because of it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ruel A. Macaraeg
|
| Posted: Wed 03 Nov, 2004 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Mike,
Thanks both for the insights and for the understanding. 
* Your description of a spherical fighting space is most helpful. If I may ask: At what angle is the talwar's edge intended to strike its target? This is what I mean. With nearly all straight cutting swords, the line of the edge is meant to strike its target perpendicularly, and in accomplishing this the wrist rotates the hand forward toward the target. With many other sabers, it seems that the line of the edge strikes somewhat less perpendicularly, allowing the cut to draw/pull backward. Still, though, the wrist rotates the hand forward so as to add that momentum to the cut.
This seems to be where those of us untrained in talwar use have difficulty. The disc pommel prevents the wrist from rotating, even though the weight and motion of the strike are rotating the sword (and hand) forward. This is where we experience pain in the wrist or palm-heel, as the pommel rotates into them.
So, it may instead be the case that the talwar's type of cut (and that of Hindustani swords in general, many of which also have the disc pommel) doesn't involve wrist rotation. I've always wondered how that was possible -- to cut without forwarding the hand -- but perhaps the answer lies in how the line of the edge is angled in relation to the target? In other words, rather than being perpendicular, it would be nearly parallel, and the edge of the sword would 'glide' across the targe and slice it rather than making an initial hard, deep impact as with other swords and sabers.
Is that how you are taught to make cuts -- with an angled slice?
* Related to this, if you don't mind sharing I'd like to hear about how one changes lines of attack with the talwar -- eg. for feints or parries. As with cutting, these motions when used with other swords tend to involve considerable wrist flexion, yet again these "normal" motions are restricted by the disc pommel.
* One last musing I'll offer for the moment: It seems reasonable that talwar fighting made significant changes between the late Mughal period, characterized by more traditional Hindustani-Rajput arms and tactics, and the time in which the Sikh Empire arose in the early 19thc. By then, Western drill and armaments were being adopted, and armor and heavy shields were becoming obsolete. It could well be that talwars themselves and the fencing systems supporting them evolved into lighter, faster styles during this final phase.
Anyway, those are just some off-hand notions. Thanks again for your input, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Stillwell
|
| Posted: Wed 03 Nov, 2004 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ruel A. Macaraeg wrote: | Hi Mike,
* One last musing I'll offer for the moment: It seems reasonable that talwar fighting made significant changes between the late Mughal period, characterized by more traditional Hindustani-Rajput arms and tactics, and the time in which the Sikh Empire arose in the early 19thc. By then, Western drill and armaments were being adopted, and armor and heavy shields were becoming obsolete. It could well be that talwars themselves and the fencing systems supporting them evolved into lighter, faster styles during this final phase. . |
You may well be right, and I'm sure better qualified to have an opinion on this than myself.
I don't feel able to answer any in depth questions about the use of the talwar, and again suggest you contact the Sikhs themselves. There is not one gatka [which specifically refers to the stickfighting] and differing opinions and styles exist - perhaps as many as there are teachers in some respects, since I don't know two people who teach, or fight, in the same way. The only part of your post I feel able to comment on is in regard to feints etc, and my understanding of those obviously only covers the ones I've understood! With or without buckler the sword is always moving [rather like some knife-fighting I've seen]. Since one is always cutting and weaving [usually, not always by any means] there's the question of which cut you'll commit to, so many feints and false moves there, and also once launched changing which line it actually arrives. I could start listing all the tricky stuff I've picked up so far but I'm not sure that would be answering your question.
I've taken many clips of training and fighting, and though I'm not very technically minded I have permission to put a dozen representative clips on a website coving different aspects of training from a students point of view. On the meantime if you're interested send me a PM.
To be honest I'm more interested in your opinions than mine. All I know is what the fighting's like, nothing else. Why not get in touch with the people whose tradition it is? I'm like someone who has done a year or two's karate, say, explaiing what it's all about!
In truth, I don't know the answers yet.
Best
Mike
Do you now know what beauty is for?
And have you changed your life because of it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ruel A. Macaraeg
|
| Posted: Wed 03 Nov, 2004 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks again for your input, Mike. I apologize if it seems like you're being bombarded with questions; it's just that it's a rare privilege to have a practitioner available for discussion (and one of whom we're most jealous of the opportunity to study the art, BTW!). Arvind and Perpinder Singh are both Sikhs and Gatka players as well, but I don't recall seeing either of them around recently...
| Quote: | | To be honest I'm more interested in your opinions than mine. |
I'll try to make them interesting, then! Actually, much of what I've been thinking about talwar is in regards to its evolution and the indirect evidence we can deduce from studies of fashion. I had gathered those thoughts in the link above, but as my site will be down for a bit I'll quickly review them here.
From the looks of it, the talwar in its present shape didn't exist in early Mughal times (early-mid 16thc.); a mix of classic Turkic sabers and proto-talwar type swords are shown in manuscript illustrations. By Akbar's time in the late 1500s, a clear early talwar type seems to emerge, and by Shah Jahan's reign in the mid-late 1600s the talwar in its present form already completely dominates all other sword forms. I find it quite remarkable that a new form of sword would be able to replace two very well-established sword traditions -- Central Asian Turkic and Hindustani/Rajput -- in so short a time, but the pictoral evidence is unambiguous.
There is also a progression in what is worn with the talwar and how it is carried. In those early Mughal illustrations up to the time of Akbar, both non- and proto-talwar swords are worn in the Turkic manner, suspended from the belt by two straps edge-downward and hilt forward, and the costume worn is a type of Persian jama (when not armored). In Shah Jahan's time the true talwar is worn in the same way, but with a costume reflecting more Rajput than Persian style. I tend to think that the manner of carry indicates a cavalry predisposition, since this seems to be the way mounted (or at least horse-riding infantry) tend to wear swords throughout history (cf. Japanese tachi, contemporary Chinese dao, European knights, etc.).
From the 1700s to early 1800s many surviving armors (esp. the one in the Royal Armouries) show the use of a shoulder-slung baldric in place of the belt suspension. Then finally, from the mid-1800s on, talwars are shown carried in hand, while at the same time costume changed to a more Europeanized form. It looks as if by this time the talwar was being used much like a walking stick, the way European officers seem to have often done.
I'm strongly of the opinion that fashion provides very important clues to the uses of weapons in their original context. However, as it stands, I'm not sure if we have enough information to start forming useful hypotheses yet. It seems alot of basic research on antique talwars themselves needs to be done, including finding ways to provenance and reliably date pieces and determining average weights, lengths, widths, and thicknesses. In this effort, I'm sad to say that even the online Gatka sources I've seen haven't done much of any academic quality; for example, the www.gatka.de site simply plagiarizes Stone's Glossary for its weapons page -- making it practically useless as source material.
Anyway, those are the kinds of things I think about when considering talwar -- probably not what you were looking for...!
* I would like to speak with teachers of the art themselves eventually, but want to have my own ideas (and questions) well-formulated first so I won't look stupid. I am most curious about your saying that Gatka refers only to the stick art; many of us were under the assumption that it included the fully bladed arts as well.
But yes; let me think out my technique questions a little further and I'll PM you once I have them organized. I'm anxious to try out any cool moves you might be able to share. 
|
|
|
|
|
Zach Stambaugh
|
| Posted: Wed 03 Nov, 2004 5:01 pm Post subject: a novice's simple question |
|
|
Is the disk pommel intended to be used for strikes?-- as in a back handed motion similar to pounding one's fist on a table?
It seems from appearance that it could be used in this manner and injure the target with the round projection on the pommel, while spreading the impact across the heal of the hand and shielding most of the fist.
I have no direct knowledge, but I though I might ask you as a practitioner if you do those types of strikes.
It is better to be over careful a hundred times than dead once. --- Mark Twain (give or take a slight misquote)
|
|
|
|
|
Douglas S
|
| Posted: Thu 04 Nov, 2004 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
From the gatka web-site, it seems that the teachers of this are are real Sikhs from Punjab. I wouldn't say that inclusion of handy material from Stone made it completely suspect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ruel A. Macaraeg
|
| Posted: Thu 04 Nov, 2004 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Douglas,
I was thinking more of the fact that they chose to plagiarize, rather than speak from their own experience. Plagiarism itself is a strong indication of lack of knowledge, and one has to wonder why they'd need to do so at all when they presumably have direct acess to authentic sources of knowledge themselves.
It's much the same as, for example, how many European fencing or Chinese martial arts 'masters' are completely uninformed about the history of the weapons they use (or the weapons from which they were derived), and never apply critical thinking to the sources which they superficially consult.
|
|
|
|
|
Douglas S
|
| Posted: Sat 06 Nov, 2004 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, honestly, just because they're "real" Punjabis doesn't mean they have real-world combat experience...
The most important point is, if a weapon can be developed and used like this, then it changes some of the arguments in the Viking sword arena.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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