Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk X

[Knaight]

In other words, the answer to "How hard is it to kill someone on a scale of 1 to 10?" is "Yes".

It's more that it's a bell curve across that scale, where all of 3-7 or so actually seem at all reasonable.

[Incanur]

Wounds from pointed weapons obviously aren't going to show up as well on skeletal remains (and may possibly be misidentified if it were a strike from something like a broad, leaf bladed spear). Additionally you need to consider whether or not the cuts were delivered to already wounded enemies execution style or in a fit of rage.

Sure, but the sheer volume of severed bones - particularly leg bones - at Visby in particular suggests that cuts mattered a lot in at least that one battle.

Exact numbers for what caused the most casualties tend to be really iffy, but for most scenarios I don't think missiles would be that surprising. If you have a battle that drags on for half the day, then you are going to have huge numbers of missiles continuously being launched but at any given time a only very small proportion will be involved in melee combat (and even fewer actually close enough to be using swords or other cutting weapons).

That's not necessarily how ancient, medieval, and Renaissance-era battles in Europe actually worked. From the Spartans to the Swiss, effective troops gained victory in close combat. Because of armor, bows and crossbows hardly ever won the field on their own. If missiles could have inflicted the majority of the causalities, the great melees you see at battles like Cannae, Towton, Flodden Field, Novara, and so on wouldn't have happened. Gunpowder weapons eventually decreased the importance of close combat, which late sixteenth-century military writers mentioned explicitly.

At Novara, the front rank of the landsknecht formation experience a death rate of roughly 97%. While they had some gunners on their side, I haven't seen any evidence of missile weapons on the Swiss side. That shows you how deadly the press could be.

But at the same time you have to remember that survival is somewhat of a carpshoot and I don't think it would have been good practice, at all, to assume you would be completely fine after taking an arrow or a small-sword to the arm.

Of course not, and Silver never would have suggested such recklessness. After all, his martial style emphasizes defense.

[Morty]

A rather broad question to everyone: if I wanted to read some swordfighting manuals and treatises, which ones would you suggest?

[No brains]

A rather broad question to everyone: if I wanted to read some swordfighting manuals and treatises, which ones would you suggest?

Insofar as I can tell, this book pretty good.
http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Sword.../dp/1581600046

I have it and I love to read it. Don't know if it's good but it seems pretty intelligently written. It includes loads of information on the composition, shape, and wielding of one and two handed swords.

[Hawkfrost000]

A rather broad question to everyone: if I wanted to read some swordfighting manuals and treatises, which ones would you suggest?

The Art and Practice of Fencing by Ridolfo Cappo Ferro

Flower of Battle by Fiore Furlano de Civida d'Austria delli Liberi da Premariacco

those are the manuals that i study from, but they are a bit hard to read

DM

[Maclav]

Insofar as I can tell, this book pretty good.
http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Sword.../dp/1581600046

It is old, dated and wrong in a hundred ways. 14 years is an eternity from a HEMA perspective. I am surprised that thing is still in print.

And remember, flat of the strong...

if I wanted to read some swordfighting manuals and treatises, which ones would you suggest?

Are you looking for interpretation or english translation of original manuscripts? Are you looking for single source, single family, or pan-european heresy? Time frame or geographical location? Pedagogical preference?
Pointy swords, cutty swords, short or long, one or two handed.. or not even swords but staff, spear, pole arm, dagger, wrestling, cane, pugalisim... In armour or out?

I could go on. Basically, you're question is entirely to broad to answer.

[Lea Plath]

Couple of questions:

1) What did fencers use as training weapons?
2) Have cresent axes or pickaxes ever been used as a weapon by an army, a proper army, rather than just being used by a rable using anything they can get their hands on.
3)Sword canes. Slashing or stabbing and are they any good for parrying something like a long sword?

Thanks.

[Spiryt]

Couple of questions:

1) What did fencers use as training weapons?
2) Have cresent axes or pickaxes ever been used as a weapon by an army, a proper army, rather than just being used by a rable using anything they can get their hands on.
3)Sword canes. Slashing or stabbing and are they any good for parrying something like a long sword?

1. Depends on when and where... Blunt swords, wooden wasters or specifically constructed feders would be used in Europe.

2. Any sort of dedicated army wouldn't be really using tools by definition.

There are some mentions of Roman legionaries using picks etc. in emergency, but there are always atypical situations.

I'm not sure what do you mean by "crescent axe" though.

[Hawkfrost000]

Couple of questions:

1) What did fencers use as training weapons?
2) Have cresent axes or pickaxes ever been used as a weapon by an army, a proper army, rather than just being used by a rable using anything they can get their hands on.
3)Sword canes. Slashing or stabbing and are they any good for parrying something like a long sword?

Thanks.

1. Ridolfo recommends unsharpened rapiers helping you to understand the "true fight"

Slashing and Stabbing, i would not want to parry a Longsword unless i had a good solid crossguard.

DM

[No brains]

It is old, dated and wrong in a hundred ways. 14 years is an eternity from a HEMA perspective. I am surprised that thing is still in print.

And remember, flat of the strong...

Do tell! I hate to think I know the wrong things. What are some of the most glaring errors/ other reasons the book is bad?

[Straybow]

There's a video on youtube where a guy is touting the practice of parrying with the flat of the blade. With each demonstration he says "flat of my strong" meaning the outside of the blade wrt the right hand.

Many practitioners feel that this only works in the training room, not in heated contest with full strength blows...

[Hawkfrost000]

There's a video on youtube where a guy is touting the practice of parrying with the flat of the blade. With each demonstration he says "flat of my strong" meaning the outside of the blade wrt the right hand.

Many practitioners feel that this only works in the training room, not in heated contest with full strength blows...

None of the Longsword instructors i have worked with have recommended parrying with the flat, it seems pointless and denies you a fair bit of leverage that you get from a true edge parry.

DM

[Xuc Xac]

With each demonstration he says "flat of my strong" meaning the outside of the blade wrt the right hand.

"Flat of my strong" means using the flat (non-edge) part of the strong. The strong is the third of the blade near the hilt. It has nothing to do with right or left or inside or outside.

[Talakeal]

I thought parrying edge to edge was horrible practice and destroyed the blade? I have seen many people state that Hollywood fight scenes include people parrying edge on edge is a major flaw of movie recreations of sword fights.

[Maclav]

Please, oh gods, please no.. we shall not have the flat vs edge argument here! ;)

(I personally aim to parry my edge to your flat, often on an oblique angle (as in not 90deg) in such away as to gain an advantageous bind or beat.)


As to the book, its based off very old, limited translations of limited amounts of material. It makes broad, sweeping generalizations and distils all of the nuance found in the material away into a bland generic framework of assumptions. Then it builds a few fighting systems on those assumptions. So other than in a very high level view it's wrong it almost everything. There a few nuggets of us in there burred beneath a steaming pile of Mr Clements's special kind of "wisdom" and an a supper sized helping of ignorant diatribe about how much "better" his **** smells because he does it for realz and with "martial intent"! (And then continues on to instruct the reader how to make a padded weapon?!)

Anyway, there are dozens of other books out there that will showcase historical swordplay without all the arrogance and bull****. They just tend to focus on one thing, instead of trying to lump it all into one contrived pile.

[Galloglaich]

Yeah the book in question is very out-dated, it's only marginally relevant at this point and that is being generous.

Please just skip the whole edge-flat thing it was done to death years ago.

Interpretation books don't usually last very long in terms of usefulness, because the understanding of the fencing systems is moving so fast right now. There are some halfway decent ones out there, and some pretty good training DvDs and so on, but the fact is that Historical Fening isn't that easily accessible without a lot of effort and there is nothing out there that can give it to you on a silver platter. Most people study translations of the original books, which are not easy to understand on your own. It's roughly the equivalent of studying Karate or Kung Fu.

That said, there are a lot of good translations out there and various other useful tools online (like the Wiketenauer and numerous how-to videos). We could reccomend some resources but you'd really need to narrow it down a little more. We have fencing manuals from the 13th Century through the 19th, from a German Language Tradition, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, English and French; for sword and buckler, longsword (hand-and-a-half, not the D&D longsword), montante (true two handed sword), transitional rapier (usually includes rapier with dagger, with buckler, with shield (rotella), with cloak and various other approaches) true rapier (see previous), smallsword, backsword, messer (sort of like a machete), dussack (sort of like a curved machete with a knucklebow), saber, staff, spear, pollaxe, dagger, and unarmed. And even some more exotic weapons like two-handed flail, sickle, and scythe.

There are some youtube videos which go through techniques. Here is an old youtube video with a progression of a few of the German Longsword techniques, done slow so you can see them.

http://www.youtube.com/​watch?v=HC5F...=rel​mfu

This one has some of the same techniques done at a higher speed and level of intensity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIKMP...eature=related

G

[Kalaska'Agathas]

A rather broad question to everyone: if I wanted to read some swordfighting manuals and treatises, which ones would you suggest?

If I may propose a sort-of corollary to this: if I wanted to study HEMA, where should I look for instruction? If I cannot find an instructor/group in my area, what methods of study should I take?

[endoperez]

2) Have cresent axes or pickaxes ever been used as a weapon by an army, a proper army, rather than just being used by a rable using anything they can get their hands on.
3)Sword canes. Slashing or stabbing and are they any good for parrying something like a long sword?

There existed axes made and used specifically as weapons instead of tools. The same is true for hammers or picks. They were different from the tools they're named after, but were used.

Persians seem to have used different axes, including one-handed sagaris.


Vikings seem to have used axes, but I don't know if you consider them a proper army.

Sailing ships in the 17th to 19th centuries could be boarded, or invaded by the sailors of the other ship, and it seems a boarding axe was one of the melee weapons preferred for this task.

I've also seen beautiful, curved Indian and Persian war-axes. but I've got no idea what they were used for, or if they were ever issued for front-line soldiers of an army. Mughal infantry might have used axes, but I don't really know much about that. Some pretty axes below.

Spoiler

Show

http://antiques-arms.com/sold-indo-persian-axe

edit: the images don't seem to work, but you can follow the link below.
http://www.antiqueswordsonline.com/i...headed-war-axe

Here is a well-made page which seems to give a rather detailed explanation of various European medieval weapons. Most of the axes and picks are found under blunt weapons or polearms. There are several, although the page doesn't really tell how widely they were used.
http://www.medievalwarfare.info/weapons.htm

[No brains]

Clements did seem to be a bit of an arrogant man, I rolled with it when I read the book but I guess he doesn't know enough to support the big head.

The label of being better at the broad than the specific made sense. The book never got into deep detail but the claims it made on the broad view of things seem pretty logical. I liked his argument on the logical fallacies used by people unwilling to cross train styles.

[Spiryt]

I've also seen beautiful, curved Indian and Persian war-axes. but I've got no idea what they were used for, or if they were ever issued for front-line soldiers of an army. Mughal infantry might have used axes, but I don't really know much about that. Some pretty axes below.

Spoiler

Show

http://antiques-arms.com/sold-indo-persian-axe

edit: the images don't seem to work, but you can follow the link below.
http://www.antiqueswordsonline.com/i...headed-war-axe

Here is a well-made page which seems to give a rather detailed explanation of various European medieval weapons. Most of the axes and picks are found under blunt weapons or polearms. There are several, although the page doesn't really tell how widely they were used.
http://www.medievalwarfare.info/weapons.htm

Those persian axes would be mostly ornamental things - just alright for practical use, but not really with 'everyday use' in mind... With silver inlays and all.


Anyway, if question is "if crescent axes, like battle axes with crescent like blades were used by armies" - then answer is - naturally.

Axe in different dimensions and variations was very popular weapon trough the whole medieval in the hands of very different combatants.

Some examples of axes of 'crescent' shape.

Spoiler

Show

1

2


3

[Hawkfrost000]

Ah, i think i need to clarify what i said in my post above.

I meant that in my parry i would bring my (usually true) edge into contact with my opponents sword, this can be on the edge of the blade or on the side. I would rarely attempt to make an edge on edge parry, but i always bring my edge into contact with my opponents sword in a parry.

DM

[Morty]

It is old, dated and wrong in a hundred ways. 14 years is an eternity from a HEMA perspective. I am surprised that thing is still in print.

And remember, flat of the strong...




Are you looking for interpretation or english translation of original manuscripts? Are you looking for single source, single family, or pan-european heresy? Time frame or geographical location? Pedagogical preference?
Pointy swords, cutty swords, short or long, one or two handed.. or not even swords but staff, spear, pole arm, dagger, wrestling, cane, pugalisim... In armour or out?

I could go on. Basically, you're question is entirely to broad to answer.

Yeah the book in question is very out-dated, it's only marginally relevant at this point and that is being generous.

Please just skip the whole edge-flat thing it was done to death years ago.

Interpretation books don't usually last very long in terms of usefulness, because the understanding of the fencing systems is moving so fast right now. There are some halfway decent ones out there, and some pretty good training DvDs and so on, but the fact is that Historical Fening isn't that easily accessible without a lot of effort and there is nothing out there that can give it to you on a silver platter. Most people study translations of the original books, which are not easy to understand on your own. It's roughly the equivalent of studying Karate or Kung Fu.

That said, there are a lot of good translations out there and various other useful tools online (like the Wiketenauer and numerous how-to videos). We could reccomend some resources but you'd really need to narrow it down a little more. We have fencing manuals from the 13th Century through the 19th, from a German Language Tradition, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, English and French; for sword and buckler, longsword (hand-and-a-half, not the D&D longsword), montante (true two handed sword), transitional rapier (usually includes rapier with dagger, with buckler, with shield (rotella), with cloak and various other approaches) true rapier (see previous), smallsword, backsword, messer (sort of like a machete), dussack (sort of like a curved machete with a knucklebow), saber, staff, spear, pollaxe, dagger, and unarmed. And even some more exotic weapons like two-handed flail, sickle, and scythe.

There are some youtube videos which go through techniques. Here is an old youtube video with a progression of a few of the German Longsword techniques, done slow so you can see them.

http://www.youtube.com/​watch?v=HC5F...=rel​mfu

This one has some of the same techniques done at a higher speed and level of intensity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIKMP...eature=related

G

Heh, yeah, I guess the question really was too broad. If that helps, I'm looking for information on longsword fencing and, if possible, I'd like it to be translations or interpretations of texts written in medieval or reneissance times.
The first link seems to be broken, but the other one works... and I think I've seen something by those guys once. It looks like it'll be useful too, so thanks. And as it happens, I'm looking for longsword techniques specifically.

[mcv]

A rather broad question to everyone: if I wanted to read some swordfighting manuals and treatises, which ones would you suggest?

There are tons of good books (and even more bad ones), but one book that lots of people seem to recommend is Sigmund Ringeck's Knightly Art of Combat by Lindholm and Svard. There's also Sigmund Ringeck's Knightly Art of the Longsword, but I have no idea what the differences are.

As for the whole parrying on the flat thing, there are parries that, if executed well, will generally catch your opponent's edge on your flat. The hanging guard, for example. But others won't. And in some situations, even trying to catch his edge on your flat will waste your blade's energy. My instructor (Lopes) recently addressed this when handling the krumphau. While it's generally used to attack your opponent's wrists, it can also be used to knock his sword out of the center. He said some people claim you should use the flat to do that. He claimed that it's biomechanically wasteful; you'll throw away all your swords energy if you do that. Apparently a krumphau simply needs to be done with the edge.

[Straybow]

"Flat of my strong" means using the flat (non-edge) part of the strong. The strong is the third of the blade near the hilt. It has nothing to do with right or left or inside or outside.

Ah. He may even have 'splained that at the beginning. I don't recall, I only remember the incessant "fladda ma stroung... fladda ma stroung... fladda ma stroung."

Please, oh gods, please no.. we shall not have the flat vs edge argument here! ;)

(I personally aim to parry my edge to your flat, often on an oblique angle (as in not 90deg) in such away as to gain an advantageous bind or beat.)

I can only say that the English prefer to block rather than parry, calling it a "stop." The intent is to completely stop the energy of the attack. You get your timing right, you take away a little of that energy to launch your counter. To do that you need edge on edge. You will wear down and break practice swords, even the best made ones. Since I moved away four years ago my buds say they've broken all the swords we were using, even a really solid Cold Steel basket hilt backsword we deemed indestructable.

[Galloglaich]

Heh, yeah, I guess the question really was too broad. If that helps, I'm looking for information on longsword fencing and, if possible, I'd like it to be translations or interpretations of texts written in medieval or reneissance times.
The first link seems to be broken, but the other one works... and I think I've seen something by those guys once. It looks like it'll be useful too, so thanks. And as it happens, I'm looking for longsword techniques specifically.

This is the broken link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC5FI...feature=relmfu

Assuming you want to go with Medieval longsword, you still have to further specify the Italian system (Fiore / Vadi) or the German-language system (Liechtenauer) and if the latter, 15th vs. 16th Century.

Mcv mentioned the Lindholm ringeck book which though old, is good because it has the original translation in addition to their (now petty dated) interpretation, side by side.

The best overall HEMA book to get if you want to understand what historical fencing is, is this overview by Sydney Anglo from 2000, luckily still available and in print

http://www.amazon.com/The-Martial-Ar...5189533&sr=1-1

There were a lot of translations of German manuals done but unfortunately many of the best are now out of print. They should be coming back, but they had a problem with some publishers which haven't been resolved.

This is a good translation of one of the 'folio' style German manuals

http://www.amazon.com/Codex-Wallerst...6&sr=1-1-spell

There is also a superb online resource for the German manuals, with translations of nearly all of them:

http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Main_Page

Here is some Italian stuff.

Fiore (this is a partial translation I think of the Getty version of Fiore's Flos Duelletorum, but it's relatively cheap and very nice to look at. Fiore has superb illustrations.)
http://www.amazon.com/The-Knightly-A...ref=pd_sim_b_7

This is a really good, practical guide to Medieval dagger techniques which derives largely from Fiore

http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-And-R...ref=pd_sim_b_6

This is Vadi but it's an old translation, don't know much about it other than that.

http://www.amazon.com/Arte-Gladiator...ef=pd_sim_b_10

Hope that helps. beyond that, get connected to a group in your region

[Maclav]

Guy Windsor has a couple of Fiore books due out in the next couple months as well as a new translation of Vadi which should prove to be useful.

If you are working from source material, Tom Leoni's translation of the Getty is probably the most important "book" to get.

[No brains]

I have a 'simple' question relating to learning swordplay.

If a person tries to just do what feels natural, how successful would they be in sword fighting? Are there any maneuvers that are very effective but are not natural?

[Knaight]

If a person tries to just do what feels natural, how successful would they be in sword fighting? Are there any maneuvers that are very effective but are not natural?

What "feels natural" is likely what they've been exposed to before. Do something a lot, and it will feel natural; as such there aren't really any "unnatural" movements in sword fighting. That said, there are instincts that have to be overcome, such as the instinct to dodge back when it is better to close and block.

With that said, the fundamental problem with what "feels natural" is that people imitate what they see. As such, you're liable to see people trying the absurd spins of Star Wars, or the overly wide and slow hacking in so many fantasy movies. These really don't work. Plus, a lot of ideas just won't occur to most people because of their backgrounds - half swording is the most obvious of these, but there are others.

It gets worse taken out of swords. Give someone a spear, and odds are they'll hold it just like they usually show up in films, which is often in the middle, or even forwards of the middle.

[Spiryt]

I have a 'simple' question relating to learning swordplay.

If a person tries to just do what feels natural, how successful would they be in sword fighting? Are there any maneuvers that are very effective but are not natural?

Swords are obviously not 'natural' in any real way to human beings, so what's natural would definitely depend on person and their general ideas, athletic/motor capabilities/patterns and so on.

So it definitely depends on person. Someone coordinated, quick, strong, brave, cold blooded etc. will do better than someone without such knacks.

[Galloglaich]

I have a 'simple' question relating to learning swordplay.

If a person tries to just do what feels natural, how successful would they be in sword fighting? Are there any maneuvers that are very effective but are not natural?

I think it depends a lot on the weapon. With a hand axe, a mace, a short sword or a saber*, against a similar sized weapon, a fast, strong, aggressive person can hold their own with simple cuts and by jumping in and out of distance to avoid being cut, and at least have a fighting chance. The main problem is going to be telegraphing attacks and an inability to effectively block. My experience with newbies is that they usually can't parry very well with almost any weapon, are surprised and discomfited when their opponent does parry, and are very easy to counter against after a parry. Newbies are also easy to feint against, though they can be unpredictable due to panic and adrenaline. The safest thing to do to an athletic 'newby' is to lure them into making a big mistake and then exploit it.

With something more challenging like a longsword or a katana, it's much harder to fight effectively without a fairly substantial level of training. You may be able to make a half-way decent cut, but you won't be able to see the distance properly, it will be very hard not to telegraph, (and a telegraph means you are likely to be met with an easy counter) parrying will be a major challenge, and what to do after a parry, or any other bind, is one of many things you will likely ponder while your opponents weapon enters your body or head.

With a really subtle weapon like a rapier, a beginner has almost no chance at all against even a half-trained opponent. The first overreaction you make means you'll be skewered a second or two later.



There are reasons why people with less training tended to be equipped with certain simpler to use weapons (or weapons for which a simple training regimen could be developed)

G

* a real saber as opposed to a sport fencing 'saber'