European Swordfighting

[Freeform]

Hi Guys,

I was just interested to find out if anyone out their practices the European Swordfighting methods. Whilst I was down in Bristol over the summer I had the pleasure of training with some euro-swordfighters and found the systems to be quite technical (10 weeks isn't enough ;) ). I was amazed to find out that there were many different schools of the broadsword.

Normally I the pop media, european fighting methods are shown to be less technical and more 'brute force' than their asian counterparts, which is obviously not true.

Thanx

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Because the European swords tend to be heftier the impression that they are more brute force than technical skill tends to be promoted. However you can fence quite happily with a broadsword, you simply get bigger. There's an interesting book called 'English Martial Arts' which you might want to take a look at.

[waya]

There are several schools here in the US that teach different eras of swordplay. A friend of mine studies Renassaince and Elizabethan fencing at one. I've seen him perform at medieval fairs and re-enactments here, it's definitely beautiful to watch.

Rob

[Darzeka]

it depends on who you are looking at.

The knights in full plate were more about brute force to win a fight but they also had some very technical aspects. They didn't need to keep their swords too sharp because they were trying to dent armor and break bones not chop arms off. Add in the use of a horse and shield and different types of weapons and there are many different styles of fighting.
It is probably the same idea as asian weapons only with more emphasis on power to get through the armor.

fencing styles were/are also very complex and diverse. With the multitude of weapons they used they had to adapt different techniques.

I think they can be equated to the multitude now of different MA's. Each one has a slightly different emphasis and direction to get to the same goal. They just find the weapon that best fits them for there situation.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Add in the fact that they could walk, and some even swim, in thick steel plating and it really doesn't matter how sharp your weapon is, its gonna hurt.

Fencing is technically a martial science by royal law. Knights would actually fence with their swords, same as fencers do nowadays, and at close to similar speeds. The brute force came in from the fact that they were absolutely huge (muscle-wise, mostly they were shorter than us today) and had enough strength to swing a heavy sword, while wearing plate armour, and change its direction in mid-air repeatedly for over an hour.

[waya]

Mostly in fencing I think of Rapiers, Epee, Sabre, or weapons of that sort. Broadswords never really caught my interest much, although the lighter hand and a half cut and thrust blades did.

Rob

[Baboon]

European swords weren't heavy and knights weren't huge. In fact, for example, when examining period armour we can see that their legs were quite small.

Swords weighted somewhere around 2 kilograms, they wren't bulky and heavy. As their eastern counterparts, they were made with the actual use in mind.

Later full-plate armour decreased the need of shield-usage in combat as the armour provided protection. The fact that you could get hit without it disabling yourself decreased the need for actual skills in combat, and the fighting style became more strength oriented and brutal. Here we should remember that the sword was not the weapon of choice against full-plate armour in all cases, hammers and maces were more effective, and finally you could kill someone in such armour by stabbing a dagger through the visor of the helmet, or to his exposed joint-behinds or armpit etc.

Nice to see this discussion going on here, this is my first post in this forum!

[johndoch]

The germans made some massive two handed broadswords in medievel times. the Glasgow museum and art gallery has some fine examples. In particuliar a variant broadsword for hunting Boers that is almost 3m long.

I think when a knight in full plated armour fell of his mount he would need the long sword to swing in large arcs to keep light infantry at bay. especially the quick ones with daggers, hammers maces etc.

[Baboon]

Yes, longer swords were made to fight against soldiers armed with pikes and better work against armour.

Let's just not mix longswords, true two handed swords and then something even longer than those.

Longswords could be used also by one hand, and knights needed the length to fight from horseback more than they needed it when not mounted.

The longer swords that had to be used by two hands were mostly made in renaissance times, after 15th century and even more after 16th century. As swords had less and less use in battlefield they eventually became decorative items (I'm not talking about rapiers), and I'd believe that the sword you mentioned is indeed a piece made for decorative purposes more than battlefield.

Most modern-day replicas of these great-swords are heavier than the originals were. Three-meter long sword would be something I'd too consider "massive", but the two-handed swords used in battle were not more than four kilograms.

[Cooler]

Welcome to the forum Baboon. You obviously know a lot about this subject myself I know next to nothing so have kept out of it :)

I studied fencing for a few years while at Drama college and loved it.

Look forward to reading more on this subject

Cooler

[johndoch]

very interesting baboon. So what would someone in full armour do to protect themselves if they got pulled of their horse. I dunno but i'd imagine they would need a weapon that would give them range due to lack of speed caused by the weight of the armour.?

[Baboon]

Thanks, Cooler.

John, you're correct, they need a weapon on foot, too! There's not much use for lances when not mounted, so they used their swords.

Long-sword was a common choice, because it was strong enough to be used against armour and provided better defensive options than a shorter sword without shield. It also had reach over shorter weapons. Other weapons were also used.

The weight of the armour wasn't such big issue in speed, it weighted about 25 kilograms, and the weight was equally spread across body (compare to modern gear marines carry, which is about the same weight). Most problems full-plate armour caused was due to overheating, it got quite warm in full-plate. :)

[johndoch]

so how long would a long sword roughly be?

[Baboon]

Roughly from one meter to 1.3 meters is what I'd consider a longsword.

[johndoch]

thanks, so a short sword would be 0.75m - 1m??

[Baboon]

Yes, those would fall in the category. 0.75m is very short, but the swords were made in various lengths.

Short sword is not an accurate term, but you could say that something from 0.8 to 1.10 meters is a length where single-hand grip swords were commonly made, and those can be called short swords or one-handed swords (there are other terms also, but those are common today). Longswords were different from short swords in that they had longer grip as well as longer blade, so that they could more easily be used with two hands.

[Freeform]

Hi Baboon, good to have you aboard!

What about the actual fighting style used with the swords? I take it was more of a hack than the oriental cut?

Thanx

[Baboon]

Hi Freeform, and thanks!

There were many different schools in medieval combat, but unfortunately (in some way) no living tradition has actually survived. Number of historical manuals and texts have survived, but most of them are relatively new, oldest ones dating back to late 13th century.

However, these manuals show us that a lot of thought was given to swordsmanship, and skills were taught and organized. What we know today is that the combat was quite straight forward and brutal, included versatile use of weapons, and pretty no-nonsense grappling and empty hand combatives.

What is evident in all manuals is that the swords were used for cutting, not hacking. The swords were made to cut, they were sharp and could do tremendous damage.

Of course, against full-plate armour it was not easy to cut through, som using the sword may have been more like "bashing". That's one reason I personally am not interested in fighting armoured as much as unarmored.

But the hacking style is not how you'd like to use a european sword, nor is it how they propably were used back then.

I really can't say about the differences between oriental sword use and the western, but generally i'd think it was not that much different. Most western swords had two edges and were perhaps more suitable to straight thrusts than a single-edged katana, this sort of things make some difference.

I'm not very familiar with eastern styles, especially the historical ones, but when all blows were allowed and it was a fight for life and death, the combat technically might come down to similiar use of swords in both cultures. The underlying basics were propably pretty much similiar.

[waya]

I don't know a whole lot of sepcifics on the historical European sword systems, but I know that sword masters were fairly common at one point, and there were many advanced schools on the subject. My understanding is that the Romans had a very advanced system of armed combat that was taught for a couple hundred years or so.

One company that I deal with for edged weapons seems to have some good historical references that they sell, as well as producing good replications of historical blades.

Rob

[LilBunnyRabbit]

When I say huge, I'm referring to brute size rather than height. Short legs don't mean small legs, it can easily mean short legs like tree-trunks.

You try swinging a longsword for a couple of hours while wearing thick steel plate and having someone else battering at you, and this was in the tournaments, not in an actual war.

[Baboon]

I don't know specifically if some form of roman combat was developed in a sense of "martial art", but they indeed did teach an army where they kept it simple, yet effective.

Pilums were the Roman main weapon, which were thrown first against the enemy in field combat. This was often effective per se, but after this they drew their short thrusting swords, gladius and used a simple style of combat (of course it was not this straight forward, but generally speaking). They walked against the enemy and used their large shields to hinder their enemies and block forthcoming strikes. They pushed hard with the shield and after that their thrusted their swords into the enemy. A simple one-two method designed to work in tight shield formations.

I haven't done much study in this area, most written Roman sources I have read deal with strategies and only shortly describe the actual hand to hand combat. I don't have enough knowledge to debate anything on this, but I'm very intrested in it!

CKDStudent, I was referring to the muscular structure of the legs. While we may think that people back then fought a lot and did heavy work we should remember that the nutrition wasn't as good as it is today and without good food muscles won't grow. Agility was also valued as can be seen from medieval artwork. Also, rarely in medieval artwork (or fencing texts) are people drawn large in size.

Tournament armor was bulkier and thicker than what was used in combat, which was due to the aim for safety in tournaments. Especially in the late medieval times safety was so important that death-incidents vere very rare.

Swinging a longsword for a long period is hard, but we all agree that it isn't what grows your muscle mass, it grows muscle endurance and stamina :)

[LilBunnyRabbit]

The ability to do it though means that you must have some degree of muscle, same as wearing the armour.

[waya]

Baboon,
If you get The History Channel, there is a show on Spartans and their system of combat showing tonight.

Rob

[Freeform]

Each european country seems to have its own style of sword fighting. Having been run shown examples of the English, German and Italian, I would say that a lot of the techniques they used are very similar in mechanics to the Japanese Jo-waza (4ft long staff techniques) this is where I got the hacking impression. Baboon, have you got any experience with the use of Western Staff fighting? If so what are the common points between the sword and the staff.

Cheers

[Baboon]

Hi!

Strength is important, I agree in this. Medieval swordsmen trained by lifting weights (rocks, etc, and I suppose their own body also), and trained with a sword that was made heavier to improve their strength.

Unfortunately I'm not very familiar with longer medieval weapons, such as poll-axes and the english quarter staff.

However, from my experience I believe the use of the longsword translates pretty well to the use of staff weapons. The "guards" of the long-sword (transitional positions from which the sword can cut to another, which were the foundation of sword teaching in historical texts) are somewhat applyable to the staff.

With quarter staff a more complex style evolved as it was a popular activity even if there was no intention to kill.

Quarter staff was held from the other end so that a longer part of the staff was used from greater range to strike, block or to deflect and wind the adversarys blows. The butt-end was also an effective weapon that could be used from closer range as well.

[John Jordan]

There are a number of manuals that detail the techniques and theories of Medieval Combat as they were actually practiced. There are a number of good books available from Chivalry Bookshelf ( http://www.chivalrybookshelf.com ). Look for titles by Mark Rector, Terry Brown, and Christian Tobler.

Many of the manuals are available for free, online. The best resource is AEMMA ( http://www.aemma.org ) take a look at their library.

Other sources include:

ARMA ( http://www.arma.org)
HEMA ( http://www.hema.freehomepage.com/ )

When talking about medieval combat you must first define the time period. Combat from 11th Century Britain is different from combat in 15th Century Italy.

Medieval martial arts, by the 14th Century in Central Europe, were quite sophisticated, both in theory and in practice.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

EMAS is another good one. There's a handful of books out, but not that many unfortunately.

To be fair though EMAS is slightly more up to date than medieval, closer to Elizabethan sort of times.

[Scotty Dog]

Hay free form,

if your still in endinburgh pay a visit to http://www.dawnduellists.org.uk/
I spent a little time training with this lot before the other half went & got pregnant ( this meant she didn't want to travel for an hour to hit me with a sword when she can just stay at home an do it :) ) they're a good bunch study'n everything from Long sword, hand & a half, rapier, saber (my fav), pole arms & side sword.

hig

[Solane]

Hi

Yes the medieval Europeans were a very short people the average height was 5.4 to 5.6 with a small few reaching 5.8 anyone over 6feet was considered a giant and very rare. This is shown by the floor length robes found in museums in the UK and Europe, especially the church museums in France. As the robes on display tend to be between 5feet and 5.3 in length. Also the buildings from those eras have lower doors and ceilings in them.
Hollywood’s depiction of 6 and 7-foot knights has a lot to answer to, But I think to be rescued by a tall 6 foot plus strapping knight is better for the film than someone no taller than the victim. :)

Also don’t forget the English Long Bow was very adapt at putting an arrow through the breast plate of a suit of full plate armour.
The French in particular did not take this well and use to cut off the first two fingers on the right hand to prevent the enemy prisoner ever using a bow again. This is also where raising your right hand and extending one or both of your first 2 fingers was born, as a sign of defiance to the enemy and as a taunt to show you were still able to use the Long Bow in defence of your country.
But as in quite a few things this show of defiance has been perverted into a totally different meaning in today’s modern society.

The peasants and serfs of that time were also only permitted to carry Quarter Staffs, Bows and Dagger (Dirks) whose blade could be from 6 to 12inches in length (Think that is the correct length) and farming equipment. Very much like the Japanes peasants. They were very skilled in there use as well.

Hope that helps

Solane

[Freeform]

Hey hig,

Thanks for the link, I'll look into it in the future (when I don't have exams pending :( )

Col

[med]

hey guys. this is an area i am largely ignorant in but i think that western arts are slightly neglected.. aside from maybe boxing.. i did hear of some very old writings being found a little while ago on the long sword techniues. the weapon is (as has been said) one handed and light. but also blunt. it had stances very similar to samurai but with the sword also used as a staff as you could grab it at both ends as well as a slashing weapon.. it interests me greatly that these warriors were not just thugs but were in fact skilled men in what were effectively arts of the sword.. plus the co incidence with swords in Japan and across the globe. especially one as complicated in use as the long sword. ive heard tell that the legends of arthur are wrong on one thing.. lancelot, described as a foreigner.. beat all of arthurs best men and didn't end them.. i know these stories are greatly exaggerated but the whole thing stinks of ronin to me. man ive got to get a life.. but just something to think about hey.. i mean what would you do if you were far away from the nearest sword making master(masters of the sword weren't neccessarily masters at making them).. a pretty fairy tale i know but thats just the sort of crap i think about..

[pgm316]

Amazing how the western world doesn't have a stronger history in developing its own martial arts. Especially when you consider the likes of England used to conquer countries as a bit of a hobby when not at war with its exsisting colonies.

Then you have the likes of the Roman army. What/how we're these soldiers taught to use weapons ??

[Cudgel]

I think the main reason that there is no continueing tradition of western swordsmanship is because the Europeans discovered newer and more deadly martial arts. The fire arms and the I push a booton and your die school of MA. They didnt need to use teh sword and so it became a sport much like many of the traditoinal MA of Japan and China have become sports. like kendo growing from kenjutsu olympic fencing gew from clasical from small sword from rapier from cut and thrust single handed swords and b-a-s-t-a-r-d-swords. which eveoled from sword and sheild.

[Scotty Dog]

The other reason was fashion,

As it was explained to me, the long sword was only for the battle field, this was replaced by the thiner one handed side sword which could be worn about town, showing that you could not only afford one but that you were considered a good enough man to carry a weapon in polite society.

some eurpoean masters then set up schools in the uk and the fashion changed to swords that used the point more than the edge (the rapier) these started to get longer & longer until they were reaching a size that could not be carried everyday, this mant the development of swords that though still using the point were shorter ( eppie & eventually the short sword ), the only exeption being the Saber which was kept mainly for millitary use, even this was fazed out by the first world war in fav of a sword using the point.

bit of a bummer that we let these arts be lost for the sake of your sword not matching your outfit

[YODA]

Anyone got a copy of George Silver's "Paradoxes of Defence" from 1599?

It basically details the martial arts of the time (London) including short sword, sword & buckler, pike, staff etc. and sets itself up against the Italian schools of long pointy thrusters :D

It has pride of place in my book library.

[Freeform]

When I was done in Bristol I had chance to meet a traditional European Swordfighting Instructor. Didn't get the chance to train with him but he did show me some things.

I was quite suprised in the differences between the individual european styles. The Italian 'pendulum' method of striking and the German small circular motions.

Cool.

[Scotty Dog]

Not got that one but I did just get a copy of Old Sword Play By Alfred Hutton, orig published in 1892 it was ment to give an over view of the development of sword play from 15th century to 18th.

not a bad book but it really is just an overview :(

heard of Paradoxes of Defence but didn't know it was still in print, have to add that to my wish list :)

[YODA]

I don't think it is in print - my copy was printed int he 1920's

[keef]

Hi,

Reference the english martial arts check out the site http://www.maisters.demon.co.uk/

The book sounds good also, has anyone read it ?

Keef

[Scotty Dog]

I don't think it is in print - my copy was printed int he 1920's

So I won't get it on Amazon then :(

where do you get these old books from yoda??? Try'ed to get a copy of that Jack Dempsey one you loaned me ages ago & couldn't find one anywhere.

hig

[YODA]

I bought 'em new - I'm 900 years old you see :D

But seriosuly - hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours of searching through old book shops & boot sales.

[Spike]

You can`t beat an old book shop, the kind that have dust on most of the books and look as if they`ve been there since the start of the printed word

[Freeform]

Yeah, books that are so old it looks like they built the building around them!

Col

[Spike]

"I was quite suprised in the differences between the individual european styles. The Italian 'pendulum' method of striking and the German small circular motions."

i know a person who has been a traditional fencer for a while. the four western styles are based around certain differenty memtailties of combat. The Russian and Germans were based around strength in which they would beat the blade out of line before attacking. The Italians were based around taking control of the enemy`s blade before thrusting into a vita area of the body. The French method of combat was beased on deception, where they relied on the enemy to over extend their original price d`faire (taking of the blade) at which point they would move their balde out of the way and thrust as the enemies blade moved away from their body:

"these started to get longer & longer until they were reaching a size that could not be carried everyday, this mant the development of swords that though still using the point were shorter ( eppie & eventually the short sword ), "

the epee de combat (epee) is designed around the standard specifications of a duelling sword. If you shaprened the point, it would run a person through before it bent.

[Cudgel]

yeah the only modern sport fencing tool I would learn. cause it would be all stabity and pokity

[Spike]

which form of "Sports fencing"?

[Spike]

which form of "Sports fencing"?

a) Foil: my opponent is dead I`m not, I get the point?
b) epee: I drew first blood, I get the point
c) saber) I caused first bleeding cut that did not damage the horse, I get the point

[Cudgel]

i meant that to me epee seems more realistic.
But I would only learn sprt fencing for amusment
I like to keep my fighting realistic using a very light piec of metal to score touches seems like sword tag.
Not that I would like to draw actual blood or cause a severe injury in practice. I just prefer to use tools that weigh as close to an actual weapon

[YODA]

Originally posted by Spike
which form of "Sports fencing"?

a) Foil: my opponent is dead I`m not, I get the point?
b) epee: I drew first blood, I get the point
c) saber) I caused first bleeding cut that did not damage the horse, I get the point


Good example of why I prefer foil. I have no interest in scratching my opponent to "satisfy honour" - I want to run the dasterdly cad through :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

i meant that to me epee seems more realistic.
But I would only learn sprt fencing for amusment
I like to keep my fighting realistic using a very light piec of metal to score touches seems like sword tag.
Not that I would like to draw actual blood or cause a severe injury in practice. I just prefer to use tools that weigh as close to an actual weapon

Unlike the foil, which when invented was one of the deadliest weapons available, what with being able to penetrate most of the simple forms of armor, often up to and including full plate mail.


Good example of why I prefer foil. I have no interest in scratching my opponent to "satisfy honour" - I want to run the dasterdly cad through

Depends how deep the cut is, give me a sabre anytime, quick slash to the neck or stomach'll take most people down.

[Cudgel]

wait a second

I thought the foil was the very flexible of the three.
And historically it was used for traing for the very reason that is wouldnt severly injure.

I would like to see a foil punch trough full plate. It lacks rigidity enough I dont even think a sporting epee would. it take scertain design of blade to punch hole in metal plates.
Like a rigid blaed that is distally tapered.

[Spike]

"Good example of why I prefer foil. I have no interest in scratching my opponent to "satisfy honour" - I want to run the dasterdly cad through "

So when someone slaps you in the face with their glove you fight o the death?
That`s tough but fair.

[Cudgel]

Now clarify some thing for me.
How can foil which is flimsy peice of metal be able to pentrate armor?

[Stolenbjorn]

I'd like to ressurrect this page as I am a dedicatded WMArtist!

I know of the following manuals from medieval times:

I-33 (sword+bucklar)
Lichtenhauer ("everything")
Fiore Del Libere ("everything")
**** De Silva ?
Talhoffer ("everything")
Mendoza (boxing from 1700)
Durer (Wrestling)
Ringek (Wrestling)

With "everything", I mean manuals that works on a whole system, incorporating wresteling, dagger, 1Hswords, 2H swords, Hellebards/2hWarhammers and sometimes allso fighting from horseback.
I train primarily "Fiore longsword, dagger and wresteling, but I'm allso about to start working on Sword and bucklar.

[SoKKlab]

Glad you resurrected this thread Bjorn,

All the following Great Books on Western Martial arts are reviewed here:

http://www.martialartsadvice.com/cat.php?cat=4

English Martial Arts-Terry Brown (Anglo-Saxon Books).
Covering the entire Armed and unarmed Gamut of English Fighting Arts of the 16th Century including Quarterstaff, Bill Hook, Broadsword, Sword and Buckler, Sword and Dagger, Fisticuffs etc

Secret History of The Sword-J Christopher Amberger
(Multi-Media Books).
Covers the Historical importance and usage of the Western Sword in Western Martial Culture from year dot til now, from Germanic, Celtic and Roman times, through Medieval to modern methods. With some asides to Oriental swords too.

Master of Defence (The Works of George Silver)-Paul Wagner, with Stephen Hand etc (Paladin Press).
Brilliant dissection of the George Silver Fighting Manual from 1599, discussion on methodology, aspects of usage, principles, vs other weapons, the True Fight etc etc.

Loads more including Longbow by Robert Hardy etc etc.

[Furikuchan]

Pardon the Scadian for a moment, but I must comment.
Martial artists usually make really great fencers. I've seen quite a few of my karate buddies pick up the art and excel. The body control and stance learned from kata transfer over to the sword easily.
However, the two-handed broadsword is highly different from the katana. It takes a lot more upper body strength, and not as much finesse to handle a two-handed sword. Still, this is not to say that using the two-handed sword is not a useful skill, it just takes a different set of skills to handle that weapon.
A problem some martial artists encounter is handling a shield. We just aren't exactly trained to hold something out to catch a blow. We want to divert or get out of the way, and, usually, a tower shield just slows us down. Again, though, using a shield is still a useful skill.
For other weapons, nunchaku skill will help you use a flail (it's not exactly the same, but you can compensate for the different weight) while bo or oar techniques transfer over to the pike very easily. (Even better, though, if you actually know how to use a naginaga!)
Hope this is enlightening.

[Cudgel]

Ok first.
Welcome fellow Scadian.

A lot of the guys a fight with devoloped great Martial arts stances and foot work from doing nothing but Caidian Shinai.


not as much finesse?

What are you smoking?

If you are useing a lot of upper body strength you are wasting your effort most of the the power should come from your hips and legs your arms just guide the strike.

Compareing a larger twohanded sword to a katana is like comparing a sports car to a heavy duty pickup truck.

Now if you were to compare say a longsword and katana or a gretesword and nodachi that would make sense.

And if holding a tower sheild slows you down heres a great idea get a smaller sheild I've used bucklers and small rounds to great effect. Tower sheilds shold be used for thing and thats at War when you are packed close and have spear men behind you.

[Stolenbjorn]

I will try to not get started on you, Furikuchan; Crudgel did that just fine :rolleyes:

Just some comments:
(I'm generalizing here, you be warned!)
Regarding stances; my experience is that the european stances are a bit more upright and with the feet a bit closer together than on eastern martial arts. There is alls a lot of emphasis on the footwork (perhaps as it was paramount for a heavily armoured knight to stand on his legs when killing an inferior protected but numerically superior enemy). You get to learn to move in 8 directions both backways and foreways, using both gathersteps and passing steps; comitted and uncomitted. Fighting with european systems allso involves working in circles rather than straight lines.

As for requiring more strength for usin Zweihenders/Longswords than Nodachi/Katana, I cannot think that is the case. My longswrod is (still) 1m30cm, weighing about 2,5 kilo. I think katanas are both shorter and heavier (kill me if I'm wrong...)

When cutting with a longsword, you can use many of the katanateqnices, many of the stances are the same. Its just that with a doubbleedged sword with a diecent crossguard you get even more options than with a katana.

Since the blade is straigth and not curced, the cut is more like throwing the blade outwards, as in a kind of stab, that is then brought down in a drawcut; that's at least what's "hot" among the longswordists today! (since we have only fractions of old manuals to work on and no masters around, we have to asume and guess a lot)

[Louie]

Hi Stolenbjorn.

I am also involved in promoting/researching WMA, much of it from a Scottish perspective which includes the Scottish sword masters, Donald MacBain and Sir William Hope, the 1790 Scottish Single-stick manual 'Anti-pugilism,' old sword dances, Highland wrestling and techniques found in historical accounts and folklore.

I also include techniques found in the 'boxing/grappling' from 16-1700's and the dagger/unarmed combat from treatises such as Fiore :)

My research has turned up a few fragments of Scottish arts that still exist; The Dirk Dance, a combative weapon 'dance' with kicks, trips & sweeps similar to traditional Highland and Glima wrestling.
Dirk combat which was practiced at least 50 years ago in Scotland and the stick art, single-stick which seems to have survived in the British Army/fencing clubs and was still being used to teach sabre in the 80's-90's by a veteran fence maestro.

My website is http://dirkdance.tripod.com

Louie

[Stolenbjorn]

Very nice!
Do you know any websites showing theese fragments?

How is it compared to Fiore (or talhoffer)?

[Louie]

There are no medieval Scottish manuscripts but a few researchers believe Highlanders maintained some medieval swordplay into the 1700's, such as the medieval guard from the I.33 Manuscript they call the Nebenhut it is a feature of the first section/step of the Dirk Dance. Advancing on your opponent with the weapon held hidden at arms length behind you....

I use the work of European masters (e.g. Petter 1674) to illustrate that techniques such as a 'Nevel' (Old Scots for a blow using the elbow), isn't only a Thai Boxing technique but was used in the 1600's Europe... (Check out my article in the magazine section of MAP)

There are no websites that I know of with these fragments, the steps of the Dirk Dance was published by dance researchers Tom & Joan Flett in their book 'Traditional Step Dancing in Scotland'
Mr Flett passed away but his only student (now in his 70's) has agreed to pass on the dance to me personnally...
Only a few weeks ago Backhold Wrestling Coach Willie Baxter mentioned to me off-hand that he was taught Dirk fighting as a teenager 50 years ago, I hope to expand on that. And I believe the veteran fencing coach is retired but he did pass on some single-stick to Edinburgh Maestro Paul MacDonald, and an English fencing coach, Milo Thurston.

Louie

[Stolenbjorn]

You should come to Dijon this easter (9 - 12 april) to the WMA congress there! Mabye we could meet?

[Furikuchan]

*holds up hands innocently*
I was merely posting my observations from my experience.
The power of nearly every technique comes from your legs, correct. However, the sheer weight of the weapon causes the slashing to be slower than that of the katana.
Good point on the sheilds, but even techniques with a buckler are different than the majority of what we are taught.
One thing I think we need to remember when comparing arts is the relative sizes of eastern and western folk. Let's face it, the size of the average samurai would be much smaller than the size of the average heraldic knight. Thus, weapons such as axes, pikes, and greatswords developed from the cultures with more body mass, while the smaller orientals came up with the tai chi sword, katana, and naginata. (The true naginata is acutally a lot lighter with a longer blade than most eastern polearms.)
Different cultures and body styles created the different fighting styles. It is still a good idea to cross-train, though.

[Cudgel]

While it is true that the swing of a gretesword would be slowerthn a shorter bladed weapon, such as a katana, that does not mean there is less finesse invovled, I beleive quite the opposite. It is so much easier to place yourself of positon with gretesword by swinging to hard and over cooercting that it requires more finesse.

About your point on Europeans being on average larger than Orientals, while that is true you should think about this, there is wider range of body types and sizes among Europeans and those of European descent than there is among Orientals.

And about fighting styles, there are a finite amount of ways that the human body can use a weapon the only real difference between fighting styles is the mindset and philosophy behind it.

[Stolenbjorn]

Originally posted by Furikuchan
*holds up hands innocently*
I was merely posting my observations from my experience.

Just curious; what is your experience with western martial arts?

Originally posted by Furikuchan
*However, the sheer weight of the weapon causes the slashing to be slower than that of the katana. ]

I beg to differ; I don't think eurpean weapons weigh anything more than similar japanese swords. This is just a myth created by holywood.

Originally posted by Furikuchan
[B]*Good point on the sheilds, but even techniques with a buckler are different than the majority of what we are taught.]

I might get you wrong here, but If I understand you correct, I think you're wrong. My trainer and other leading WMartists' latest theories is that most shields were used in similar ways as the bucklers; it's just that no manuals describing roundshields etc. have survived. When we apply the bucklar way of fighting to the other shields, the tecniqes works just as fine.

Originally posted by Furikuchan
[B]*One thing I think we need to remember when comparing arts is the relative sizes of eastern and western folk. Let's face it, the size of the average samurai would be much smaller than the size of the average heraldic knight. Thus, weapons such as axes, pikes, and greatswords developed from the cultures with more body mass, while the smaller orientals came up with the tai chi sword, katana, and naginata. ]

Well I think you're wrong. You put too much emphasis on the european greatswords that are extreme. Theese were hardly ever used in battle, and would most certainly not be used in duels perhaps exept for arenafighting. The european longsword is much more comparable with the katana (same balance, same weight, slightly longer) And as Cudgel allso sais; european aren't huge, it's just a result of heralds and trubadurs elaborating the heroes. Knights would probably grow as big as they got, due to exess of food and training and no hard labor. They would still allmost never exeed 1m75cm.

Originally posted by Furikuchan
[B]*Different cultures and body styles created the different fighting styles. It is still a good idea to cross-train, though. On this I can agree, it's very smart to cross train. That way you realize how similar the tecniqes are! Eastern martial arts have a longer unbroken tradition and better trained masters (There's actually noone in the WMA comunity that dares to even suggest to be a master; we're yet all amateurs), and we probably do have a lot to learn from Katanamasters on topics like perception, cuttingtraining, combos etc. that haven't survived with the manuals.

[Furikuchan]

*taps out* I know when I'm beat...
Okay, but seriously, as I said in an earlier post, a lot of my experience comes from the SCA. I guess my impression of the larger europeans comes from there, then. The sheer strength needed to move in that armor when I'm used to a gi is staggering...
I guess it would just be my personal martial arts style that gives me the wrong impression on the shields, then. The concept of agility and parrying for blocking comes from too many years of karate, and I don't adapt well to shield work. Although, admittedly, most of the other martial artists that had the same trouble with shields trained more in judo and jujitsu.

[Cudgel]

well what kind of armor do you wear?
Is it fit your body only?
Or is it loaner armor?
What is made of?

oNe of the reasons I never got into heavies is because I had to use loaner armor and unless you armor fits it will weigh a lot more than it should.

[Stolenbjorn]

Originally posted by Cudgel
well what kind of armor do you wear?
Is it fit your body only?
Or is it loaner armor?
What is made of?

oNe of the reasons I never got into heavies is because I had to use loaner armor and unless you armor fits it will weigh a lot more than it should.

I don't know wether this was ment for me or mr. Furikuchan
We usually don't use any armor at all, only padded gloves, sometimes not even that. We try to stop the blows, just to mark a score, but sometimes we miscalculate, somthing that causes real pain. My latest injury; a metalsword hit in the nerve in the elbow still hurts 6 weeks after. We do not aim for the head.

Some people go full contact, wearing proper armor: Plate helmets with padded headwear beneath, plate/leather gauntlets/vambraces and chainmail brynje with gamberson (padded cloth) beneath. My experience with that kind of armor is that it is quite heavy, but the trapped heat is a bigger problem.

[Cudgel]

My questions was aimed at Furikuchan.
But I alawys like hearing about what WMAist are doing

[Furikuchan]

I don't know wether this was ment for me or mr. Furikuchan
Ms. Furikuchan. ;)
Even in just my chain mail, I still have a hard time moving like I do in a gi. Give me a judo gi over this metal stuff any day.

[Cudgel]

what kind of maille? How thick are the links? what gauge wire was used? How much padding do you use?

Well there you go. You are compareing a gi, a set of clothes that is made to cover without hindering your movements, to maille, which is meant to protect your flesh from the blows of a weapon.
You should campare armor to normal clothes or to other forms of armor instead of a gi. I used to thikn some of my pratice weapons were heavy until I weighed them and found out taht even alight sword would weigh twice what my practice swrods weighed. Perception is very important.

[Stolenbjorn]

Originally posted by Furikuchan
I guess my impression of the larger europeans comes from there, then. The sheer strength needed to move in that armor when I'm used to a gi is staggering...
I guess it would just be my personal martial arts style that gives me the wrong impression on the shields, then. The concept of agility and parrying for blocking comes from too many years of karate, and I don't adapt well to shield work

When I wear armor, there's more mass to move, and I tend to move slower than when wearing nothing. But otherwise, I find the extra weight causing no problems. You'll also have problems finding a piece of armor offering so much mobility and agility as the (properly made) mail-brynje. I've allso seen folk in full plate making forewards rolls, backwards rolls, do the wheel and swim without much problems, and they are not cloned Swartzeneggers.... Apart from needing more time to sidestep, advance and retreat, the only other way armor hamper me is the problem with ventilation; overheating, that's neither a strength-related problem.

What is truely facinating, is that in the teachings of Fiore del Libere you have different tecniqes for wether you/your opponent is plated or not. He has notes stating "this should not be performed without armor" -or "this works particularly well against armor". A lot of his tecniqes for disarming/locking daggerattacks are impossible to perform when the attacker and you are in no armor, things move to fast, making small cuts, jabs and thrusts at eachother. But when properly armed, things slow down, and you allso need that more effort to get through the armor. This opens a new world of daggertecniqes that leads to horribly effective disarms, locks, breaks and throws.

Your experience makes me wonder how the weight/bulk of the armor you're used to from SCA?

[LilBunnyRabbit]

I don't have any problem moving in chain, unless I make the mistake (only once so far, never again) of sleeping in it. Then moving at all is difficult.

[Spike]

Stolenbjorn: "I beg to differ; I don't think eurpean weapons weigh anything more than similar japanese swords. This is just a myth created by holywood. "

while the weight might not be that different, the Katana was much better balanced than almost any other sword, allowing for much faster cuts.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

while the weight might not be that different, the Katana was much better balanced than almost any other sword, allowing for much faster cuts.

I've held antique longswords which are balanced perfectly where the tang becomes blade, and I challenge you to find a badly balanced sabre or rapier that was actually intended for use.

Even the rather cheap and nasty versions I've got are balanced almost exactly to my preference.

[Cudgel]

Its all a mter of preference and training.
If all you train with is katana then a longsword will probalby feel like a sharp crowbar. And vice versa.
I've handled both and I can say I prefer the balance of a longsword/b@stardsword and lighter greteswords to that of a katana.

[Stolenbjorn]

Originally posted by Spike
Stolenbjorn: "I beg to differ; I don't think eurpean weapons weigh anything more than similar japanese swords. This is just a myth created by holywood. "

while the weight might not be that different, the Katana was much better balanced than almost any other sword, allowing for much faster cuts.

I have never touched a katana, so I cannot compare, but:

-My sword has its balance point some 10cm out from the crossguard, weighs about 2,5kg and it's 1m30cm

-My friends sword has the same length, weigh about 3kg, and has its blancepoint right on the crossguard.

-Where to put the balance isn't that difficult to ajust; it's just a matter of prioritizing balance contra weight, by adding a heavier or lighter pommel. (My blade weigh 900gram)

-The way (people today think) the sword was swung from the manuals is arcing forewards into a thrust, before beeing drawn back and down in a kind of draw-cut. When cutting like this, the location of the balancepoint isn't as crucial as if you swing the sword downwards from the shoulder in one sweep.

[Cudgel]

The blance for my gretesword is about 4 inches/10 cm and it weighs 3 pounds/ 1.4 kg and is 64 inces / 1m63cm. Its nasty againts lot of stuff like polearms and twin weapons. I think there is wider variance of weigh and balance in western swords than in katana, but would have to do some research

[Forest Bill]

If anyone wants to find out more about European swordsmanship then you can download some manuals from here: aemma library (http://www.aemma.org/library_top.htm) including George Silvers 'Paradoxes of Defence' :cool:

[Gryphon Hall]

I would like to know if anyone knows anything about Spanish swordplay. You see, according to our history books, most of the original, primitive (I am not using the word "primitive" to mean under-developed and bad, more like, before assimilation with other MAs) FMAs were were combined and/or assimilated with European swordplay, making a hybrid that became Arnis/Escrima, reportedly more effective than either alone. Our national hero, Jose Rizal, is translated as being adept at fencing, but he called it Escrima, and he used a walking cane for fighting, that is, solo baston. So here is supposedly a very real link between the Western and Eastern Martial Arts; but I want to make sure and I don't have the research.

I have downloaded the free Longsword Combat manual from AEMMA, and the angles of attack are eerily similar to the Escrima I train in. Also, my Kampilan (what should be the Filipino equivalent of a broadsword, except that it is sharpened on only one edge) has the heft roughly in between that of a Katana and a European broadsword (but I have only handled one broadsword, so that info might not be very reliable).

Thanks for any enlightenment.

[Louie]

This article may be of interest regarding Spanish - Filipino MA
http://www.thearma.org/essays/influence.htm

I practice/use the training equivelent of the broadsword which is Single-stick, a 3ft Ash wood stick with a leather or whicker basket guard to protect the hand. Much of the guards/cuts are similar to FMA.
It's interesting to note that some early pictures of FMA have sticks with a hand guard similar to those used in Single-stick training by British & American navy of the same period.

Louie

[Stolenbjorn]

I think I've posted this before on this forum, but I hope it doesn't matter if I post it again :Angel:

Rumous has it that portugese sailers that came to japan in the 16th.century had a certain influence on japanese swordplay. Acording to those rumours, the japanese were so impressed with the rapier/dagger combination in duels that they evolved a katana/wakisashi-combo to exploit the possebilities. A friend of mine has supplemented my love for this rumor by informing me that fighting with a katana/wakisashi-combination was by some scools called "To fight the barbarian way". :D

This is pure speculations, but isn't it quite realistic that where different refined combatcultures meet, they tend to compare? I think this happened wherever open minded and truely dedicated younger european officers met with local cultures in the east.