Historical Swordplay Archive

  • <p>One recent development has been playing on my mind of late: the height of pedestal on which we place the masters of the various historical fencing techniques we study. In our collective hero-worship no one seems to have considered that the masters’ techniques either just plain don’t work or work only in a limited set of circumstances. This type of hagiography does not to advance our understanding of historical swordplay nor does it provide a useful basis for the future of the sport.</p> <p>The context in which a particular master wrote is the key piece of information missing from the […]</p>

    On the Sanctity of the Masters

    Posted on 15 July, 2011 | 1 Comment

    One recent development has been playing on my mind of late: the height of pedestal on which we place the masters of the various historical fencing techniques we study. In our collective hero-worship no one seems to have considered that the masters’ techniques either just plain don’t work or work only in a limited set of circumstances. This type of hagiography does not to advance our understanding of historical swordplay nor does it provide a useful basis for the future of the sport.

    The context in which a particular master wrote is the key piece of information missing from the […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>What happens when you face an opponent who read my last post and is standing in front of you in Straight Parrying or, to a much lesser extent, Iron Gate? What do you do?</p> <p>Meyer is not particularly clear on this point but, as he says, he gives a range of examples from which the reader is supposed to deduce the principles at work, many of which will be familiar from the section on the longsword or from other schools of rapier play. He says in general that “ you should not go out more than a hand’s breadth to […]</p>

    Meyer’s Rapier: Attacking the Straight Parry

    Posted on 10 June, 2011 | No Comments

    What happens when you face an opponent who read my last post and is standing in front of you in Straight Parrying or, to a much lesser extent, Iron Gate? What do you do?

    Meyer is not particularly clear on this point but, as he says, he gives a range of examples from which the reader is supposed to deduce the principles at work, many of which will be familiar from the section on the longsword or from other schools of rapier play. He says in general that “ you should not go out more than a hand’s breadth to […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>What advice does Joachim Meyer give about how to come on guard and start laying into the other guy? More technically, how should one approach the Onset?</p> <p>While he doesn’t clearly spell this out for rapier, the sheer weight of text suggests Iron Gate or Straight Parrying. This idea is backed up in the section on the Dusack, to which he continually refers the reader of the rapier section. In the rapier section he explain the entire fight from Straight Parrying before going on to outline specific techniques from the other guards.</p> <p><em>“I consider this posture [Straight Parrying] the best </em> […]</p>

    Meyer’s Rapier: In the Onset

    Posted on 27 May, 2011 | 2 Comments

    What advice does Joachim Meyer give about how to come on guard and start laying into the other guy? More technically, how should one approach the Onset?

    While he doesn’t clearly spell this out for rapier, the sheer weight of text suggests Iron Gate or Straight Parrying. This idea is backed up in the section on the Dusack, to which he continually refers the reader of the rapier section. In the rapier section he explain the entire fight from Straight Parrying before going on to outline specific techniques from the other guards.

    “I consider this posture [Straight Parrying] the best […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>How should we deal with the problem of double hits in historical fencing bouts? A double hit is when two fencers strike each other at the same time and generally means that they have both forgotten the first rule of fencing, “don’t get hit.” They’ve also forgotten the basic techniques of whatever tradition they study. If they were using sharp blades instead of blunts, the result would be what is known in the trade as “two dead idiots.”</p> <p>(I know lots of folks are against competition in historical swordplay. That’s beside the point. The scoring system serves here only to […]</p>

    Fencing Match Double Hits

    Posted on 13 May, 2011 | 1 Comment

    How should we deal with the problem of double hits in historical fencing bouts? A double hit is when two fencers strike each other at the same time and generally means that they have both forgotten the first rule of fencing, “don’t get hit.” They’ve also forgotten the basic techniques of whatever tradition they study. If they were using sharp blades instead of blunts, the result would be what is known in the trade as “two dead idiots.”

    (I know lots of folks are against competition in historical swordplay. That’s beside the point. The scoring system serves here only to […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>This is a puzzle that occupies more and more of my time. What sort of community should we build? What approach should we use? What does the future look like?</p> <p>To my mind, an historical fencing community must be able to handle every style of sword use from I.33 (written in 1295) to smallsword (ending roughly 1850). That’s more than 550 years of the evolution of personal armed combat. The basic problem is how can – and indeed should – one community represent this diverse a group of fencing techniques.</p> <p>There are three basic approaches that existing groups have come […]</p>

    Building an Historical Fencing Community

    Posted on 29 April, 2011 | No Comments

    This is a puzzle that occupies more and more of my time. What sort of community should we build? What approach should we use? What does the future look like?

    To my mind, an historical fencing community must be able to handle every style of sword use from I.33 (written in 1295) to smallsword (ending roughly 1850). That’s more than 550 years of the evolution of personal armed combat. The basic problem is how can – and indeed should – one community represent this diverse a group of fencing techniques.

    There are three basic approaches that existing groups have come […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>This post is part of my continuing efforts to understand the rapier techniques expounded by Joachim Meyer in his Art of Combat (1570). I’ll summarise forty-odd pages of text into one(-ish). It covers his sword alone techniques. I’ll look at sword and dagger another time.</p> <p><strong>Stance</strong></p> <p>Meyer insists on keeping the right foot forward (for the right-handed swordsman) and the stance is very forward weighted. This makes the front foot a pivot point around which the rear foot moves, generally off-line in the opposition direction to that from which an attack is received.</p> <p><strong>Postures</strong></p> <p>There are three types of posture. […]</p>

    Meyer’s Rapier in One Post

    Posted on 15 April, 2011 | 1 Comment

    This post is part of my continuing efforts to understand the rapier techniques expounded by Joachim Meyer in his Art of Combat (1570). I’ll summarise forty-odd pages of text into one(-ish). It covers his sword alone techniques. I’ll look at sword and dagger another time.

    Stance

    Meyer insists on keeping the right foot forward (for the right-handed swordsman) and the stance is very forward weighted. This makes the front foot a pivot point around which the rear foot moves, generally off-line in the opposition direction to that from which an attack is received.

    Postures

    There are three types of posture. […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>A factor which goes completely unrecognised by most practitioners as we struggle to revive the lost fighting arts of Medieval and Renaissance Europe is the differenced between “sword fighting” and “fencing”. I’m going to try to explain the difference and show how knowing the difference shapes our practice. First, let’s define the terms.</p> <p><strong>Sword Fighting</strong>: battlefield or martial swordplay skills answering the question “what’s the fastest way to put the other guy on the ground and move forward to the next target?” The focus here is on efficiency and economy of action in an environment where skill-at-arms meant life […]</p>

    Sword Fighting Versus Fencing

    Posted on 11 March, 2011 | 2 Comments

    A factor which goes completely unrecognised by most practitioners as we struggle to revive the lost fighting arts of Medieval and Renaissance Europe is the differenced between “sword fighting” and “fencing”. I’m going to try to explain the difference and show how knowing the difference shapes our practice. First, let’s define the terms.

    Sword Fighting: battlefield or martial swordplay skills answering the question “what’s the fastest way to put the other guy on the ground and move forward to the next target?” The focus here is on efficiency and economy of action in an environment where skill-at-arms meant life […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>I’m well known for my support of bouting and tournaments within the historical fencing community. If you are unwilling to test your skill at arms in a competitive environment, you need to find another hobby or, at least, drop the pretense of studying a martial art. However, for all the fantastic effort being put into making tournaments work at the moment, there’s a number of factors which I believe have not been considered or not properly thought through.</p> <p><strong>The Approach</strong></p> <p>In the German longsword schools, this is known as the <em>zufechten</em>. The fault can almost certainly be laid at […]</p>

    Thoughts on Historical Fencing Tournaments

    Posted on 17 December, 2010 | 1 Comment

    I’m well known for my support of bouting and tournaments within the historical fencing community. If you are unwilling to test your skill at arms in a competitive environment, you need to find another hobby or, at least, drop the pretense of studying a martial art. However, for all the fantastic effort being put into making tournaments work at the moment, there’s a number of factors which I believe have not been considered or not properly thought through.

    The Approach

    In the German longsword schools, this is known as the zufechten. The fault can almost certainly be laid at […]

    Continue Reading...

  • <p>I’ve been trying to find a framework into which I can fit the various techniques <strong>Joachim Meyer</strong> discusses in his chapter on rapier combat in his The Art of Combat. The chapter is filled with individual techniques and plays and it’s only at the very end of the chapter that he talks about rapier fencing in general.</p> <p><strong>On Defense</strong>:</p> <p><em>“From whichever side he sends in his cut, catch and parry his cut, and cut or thrust in at him to the same side from which he has sent his cut, before he has entirely finished it, or at least </em> […]</p>

    Tactical Advice in Meyer’s Rapier

    Posted on 10 December, 2010 | 2 Comments

    I’ve been trying to find a framework into which I can fit the various techniques Joachim Meyer discusses in his chapter on rapier combat in his The Art of Combat. The chapter is filled with individual techniques and plays and it’s only at the very end of the chapter that he talks about rapier fencing in general.

    On Defense:

    “From whichever side he sends in his cut, catch and parry his cut, and cut or thrust in at him to the same side from which he has sent his cut, before he has entirely finished it, or at least […]

    Continue Reading...

  • Q: You were not a fencing master before writing your Treatise on the Science of Arms in 1553. You were a civil engineer. What made you think you had the right experience to write such a work? CA: An engineer is a scientist, a mathematician. If he doesn’t understand geometry, his bridges collapse. Fencing is exactly the same. I’ve proved that it is nothing more than a study in applied geometry. All these so-called masters of fence who go on and on about ‘guardia di testa’ this and ‘guardia di sopra bracchia’ are all charletons. They’re monkeys reciting by rote recieved ‘wisdom.’ It’s not the middle ages any more. We live in modern times and we need to bring the modern methods of science to bear to exorcise the demons of the past.

    Interview with Camillo Agrippa

    Posted on 19 November, 2010 | No Comments
    Q: You were not a fencing master before writing your Treatise on the Science of Arms in 1553. You were a civil engineer. What made you think you had the right experience to write such a work? CA: An engineer is a scientist, a mathematician. If he doesn’t understand geometry, his bridges collapse. Fencing is exactly the same. I’ve proved that it is nothing more than a study in applied geometry. All these so-called masters of fence who go on and on about ‘guardia di testa’ this and ‘guardia di sopra bracchia’ are all charletons. They’re monkeys reciting by rote recieved ‘wisdom.’ It’s not the middle ages any more. We live in modern times and we need to bring the modern methods of science to bear to exorcise the demons of the past.

    Continue Reading...

Older Entries
Newer Entries