| Author |
Message |
|
Nicholas Allan Wilson
Location: New Orleans Joined: 16 Feb 2009
Posts: 70
|
 Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2010 9:27 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
And by facts i mean anything relating to something that could be left to interpretation.
~nicholas
|
|
  |
 |
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2010 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Hello Patrick,
I'm sorry, its not semantic hyperbole. No offense, but percussive and slicing cuts are two ways to attack with the longsword , yes both forms work. Both would effect the further outcome of a sword fight if landed with force. |
No apologies necessary David and certainly no offense taken. 
I'm aware of the techniques and that they both work, I figured that our about twenty years ago.  My entire point was that getting mired down into this kind of nit-picking really serves no benefit. Both worked, just as both curved and straight blades worked else they wouldn't have been used. Discussing which is best, Harrys entire point with starting these two threads, really serves no purpose as they both did the job intended. There are far more interesting and educational aspects to explore. (and I will point out that Harry seems to be refering to a single-handed sword, such as an Oakeshotts Type X which he's mentioned repeatedly. That's a bit different animal than a longsword)
Then again, I have no dog in this fight so I'll bow out and leave it to the rest of you. Enjoy.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
 |
|
|
Harry J. Fletcher
|
| Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2010 11:16 pm Post subject: Harry in Defense of Harry |
|
|
Patrick, I admit that I prefer the katana because I find easier it to cut with and these issues were dealt with in the post on the Hanwei Shinto Elite. This post is completely separate and nowhere will you find me comparing or addressing a curved sword such as a katana to a straight bladed medieval sword; however, I think a two handed sword is appropriate to this discussion since the sine qua non is percussion, cleaving, and cutting aspects of a straight bladed sword.
At first I subscribed to the theory of the sword as a cutting or slicing instrument but in my cutting tests I realized just how hard it is to cut targets under controlled circumstances. How much harder must it be under extreme stress to cut. A sword blow doesn't necessarily have to cut because it can cause a momentary distraction i.e terror on the part of one's opponent thus setting them up for additional blows and hopefully cuts. Any cuts made are going to made without finesse so must be of a cleaving nature. Practice at the pell insure that sword blows would be severe as did practice with heavy wooden swords and sheilds. When those strong muscles delivered a sword blow, stroke, or cut the force behind it was very strong indeed.
There seem to be two schools of thought 1. the slash and bash 2. the slice and dice.
In the course of war and training certain sword fighting moves were taught and over centuries developed into codified systems which were mainly forgotten and now are being interpreted and revived from the few existing manuscripts.
Now different systems are being tried and are evolving and taught by people like Messrs. Teague and Edelson. If they happen to disagree that is well and good. Hopefully it won't come to sword blows!
Regards,
Harry
Because something was done or it works and to leave it at that is to close one's mind. Questions need to be asked such as how does it work or in this case how did it work. To question is to provoke debate and thought, and perhaps, new ways of interpretation over blind acceptance.
Regards,
Harry
To Study The Edge of History
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Cha
|
| Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2010 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nicholas Allan Wilson wrote: | | P. Cha wrote: | | Harry, you once again donīt have enough experience to really understand about western swords if think cleaving and bludgeoning is what they are for. |
You should really be careful when attacking someone's experience. Unless you have killed someone with a sword in battle that is... Otherwise it may be better to just say you disagree.
~nicholas |
Umm a better understanding of swords says that cleaving and bashing isnīt a good idea. I have done quite a bit of training and even experiments with armor with various simulators and real swords to come to a conclusion that is pretty much agreed upon by the WMA community...i.e. those who actually study this stuff. Harry by previous post is a rank amateur with euro sword and he prefers the katana...I think it is safe to assume that we can call his experience into question as he can very well be dong things all wrong...which then calls his conclusions into question.
Now as for a killing somebody with a sword...nope...but I was in a real swordfight in high school using a katana (yeah I studied JSA in high school).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colt Reeves
|
| Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2010 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I really don't get here, is how Harry failed to cut through milk jugs filled with water. I mean, is the way one cuts with a straight sword really that different from a curved sword? Harry, is your sword sharpened?
Sorry if that comes across badly. Not trying to insult you Harry, just a little surprised. (Though I'm more surprised at the directions the various portions of this discussion have been going. A fair portion of this is a bit over my head, and I feel sort of like a white belt back in Tae Kwon Do listening to a bunch of black belts talk about the specifics of forms and techniques I've never heard of.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Lamb
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nicholas Allan Wilson wrote: | | J. Scott Moore wrote: | [quote=
but IMHO it is a pointless one. |
Here, Here! |
Yeah, this thread is about cutting, not thrusting...
Please, try the veal!
|
|
|
|
|
Steven Reich
Location: Arlington, VA Joined: 28 Oct 2003
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 6:00 am Post subject: Re: Lot Of Ground To Cover Here |
|
|
| David Teague wrote: | | FYI, in my use of the longsword I have two ways of striking (hewn), one is a slicing cut, the other a percussive strike. I can show you the next time we meet (which won't be at the W-4 I'm sorry to say). With my 18th century backsword studies it's a slicing cut. |
Ah man, I was hoping you'd be there...Oh well.
Perhaps I didn't do my best at making my point (I blame it on the beer). What I was trying to say is that there seems to be this belief that somehow the mechanics of a cut with a Katana are radically different than are the mechanics of a cut with a Longsword (or other straight-bladed weapons, although as I sword western swordsmanship also includes curved-bladed weapons), as if you can just draw the edge across your opponent with the form and he falls to pieces while the arming sword or longsword must be used like a bludgeon. Of course the draw component can exist to different degrees in a cut (i.e. from none at all to all draw), and the curve of the blade might affect that somewhat, but even a Katana doesn't have that radical of a curve (especially as compared to some of the one-handed swords from eastern Europe and Asia). Instead, I see a cut as the method of putting the edge onto the target so that it delivers the most damage: this generally means a percussive element combined with a slicing element. No percussive element means just a drawing motion like cutting meat with a butcher's knife, and that is not the primary type of cut for any system of swordsmanship that I know of (I'm sure you'd agree that the backsword, with its draw component is still delivered with a percussive element). However, even within the same system and with the same sword, not every cut will be the same and as your longsword cuts might have different degrees of each element, so too might the cuts of a Katana.
My problem is with what I feel is a false dichotomy between the "Katana way" and the "Knight's way". Even with the "Viking" swords, I just don't think that they ever felt that a sword was anything other than a sword: a sharp, bladed weapon meant for cutting, the fact that they have a rounded tip just means they were less inclined to be used for thrusting, not that their cutting was any cruder. Just because we read about knights "raining blows" upon opponents, does not mean that they were crude "bashing" blows (for that matter, there is a school of Japanese swordsmanship whose primary tactic might be described as "raining blows upon their opponents"--are they treating their weapon like a bludgeon or a sword?)
Anyway, this post isn't all in reponse to you (I doubt we're far from the same page on this).
Steve
Founder of NoVA-Assalto, an affiliate of the HEMA Alliance
|
|
 |
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's all a matter of compromises, as always... Assuming similar balances and edge profiles (which of course is rarely verified ):
- The curved sword has an automatic shearing effect because the edge hits at an angle. You can do it with a straight blade too (leading with the hilt or pulling it as you cut, not after) but it's technically more advanced
- The straight sword has more percussive power, because the speed of the edge can be perpendicular to it. In that case there is less opportunity for the target to redirect the power of the strike or letting it glance off. Which is possibly why very few (none?) stick arts employ curved sticks, I guess...
- The curved sword also has some automatic edge alignment because its CoG is often out of alignment from the handle. It's harder to cut flat with a strongly curved sword in my experience (i.e. you have to do it on purpose)
- But of course the straight sword enjoys some advantage in thrusting
In my opinion, though of course the primary purpose of a sword is to cut, the percussive element must not be forgotten and that's indeed one area where the straight swords have a slight advantage. If you have just your sword and the guy in front of you is armoured, you might prefer to go fro the gaps, but at times there won't be a choice and a good percussion can save your day. Especially against mail... In that case a heavily curved blade is not an asset.
If the object is to cut pool noodles, which are so light and elastic that they become somewhat insensitive to edge pressure, but are very sensitive to shearing and edge alignment, then a curved blade is probably a good bet and something that will work with little training.
Regards,
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Edelson
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 7:33 am Post subject: Re: Lot Of Ground To Cover Here |
|
|
| Steven Reich wrote: |
What I was trying to say is that there seems to be this belief that somehow the mechanics of a cut with a Katana are radically different than are the mechanics of a cut with a Longsword (or other straight-bladed weapons, although as I sword western swordsmanship also includes curved-bladed weapons), as if you can just draw the edge across your opponent with the form and he falls to pieces while the arming sword or longsword must be used like a bludgeon.
<snip>
My problem is with what I feel is a false dichotomy between the "Katana way" and the "Knight's way". |
Agreed. One of the problems here is that people tend to make up their longsword cutting mechanics as they go, and most don't bother to test these mechanics with test cutting, considering free play a sufficient ringer to put their ideas though.
This is one reason I strongly advocate test cutting. If you actually try to accomplish something difficult with a longsword, bad mechanics tend to go out the window and we are left with the inescapable fact that the katana and the longsword are not meant to be used that differently. A cut is a cut is a cut.
New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com
Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
|
|
|
|
|
David Teague
Location: Anchorage, Alaska Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 409
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 9:45 am Post subject: Re: Harry in Defense of Harry |
|
|
| Harry J. Fletcher wrote: | | In the course of war and training certain sword fighting moves were taught and over centuries developed into codified systems which were mainly forgotten and now are being interpreted and revived from the few existing manuscripts.Now different systems are being tried and are evolving and taught by people like Messrs. Teague and Edelson. If they happen to disagree that is well and good. Hopefully it won't come to sword blows! |
Hello Harry,
Messrs. Teague and Edelson not only both study the German masters, we are both instructors within the Selohaar Fechtschule of Christian Tobler. Each schule is run with a different focus by it's instructor but we share the same core material.
In this case Michael has been focused of the art of cutting (and whether he gets or not, his current work has altered my curriculum 3500 miles away). My focus has been towards working from the bind and all of the groovey cool moves and countermoves that flow from the bind.
Wtih that said, at the end of the day Michael and his students know how to work the bind, and mine know how to cut and the more advanced students of each school "fight" in the same style.
Cheers,
David
This you shall know, that all things have length and measure.
Free Scholar/ Instructor Selohaar Fechtschule
The Historic Recrudescence Guild
"Yea though I walk through the valley of death, I will fear no evil: for Thou's sword art is with me; Thy poleaxe and Thy quarterstaff they comfort me."
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Edelson
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 9:54 am Post subject: Re: Harry in Defense of Harry |
|
|
| David Teague wrote: |
In this case Michael has been focused of the art of cutting (and whether he gets or not, his current work has altered my curriculum 3500 miles away). My focus has been towards working from the bind and all of the groovey cool moves and countermoves that flow from the bind.
|
I have? Cool. Tell me how! (shoot me a PM if you don't mind)
Just a minor clarification,though...I'm not focused on cutting, I'm focused on the synergy between drills, cutting and free play (done a certain way), with the idea being that an interpretation must be validated by all three to be sound.
But yes, your general point is quite sound and should be repeated many times. As much as many people don't seem to want to see this, we are far beyond the point where we HEMA guys were just shooting in the dark. We have come a long way in these arts and most of us agree on most points...our disagreements are largely over philosophical and minor technical details.
This is a little bit of a sad thing, because it means that Joe Somebody can't just pick up a book, do some speculative interpretation and be on par with the established guys, but that's what you get for progress. Today, ours is a cumulative knowledge built up over many years of hard work, and anyone starting without that cumulative knowledge will be missing out on all that has been accomplished and will have to repeat more than two decades of mistakes, epiphanies and sweat equity to get to the same point.
New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com
Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Bartek Strojek
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: |
Raven Armoury, based in England. |
Thank you for your answer!
I've seen Raven Armoury stuff once or twice before, and it definetly looks interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
David Teague
Location: Anchorage, Alaska Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 409
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello all,
I took the whole good cut bad cut to it's own thread.
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=183206#183206
Cheers,
David
This you shall know, that all things have length and measure.
Free Scholar/ Instructor Selohaar Fechtschule
The Historic Recrudescence Guild
"Yea though I walk through the valley of death, I will fear no evil: for Thou's sword art is with me; Thy poleaxe and Thy quarterstaff they comfort me."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harry J. Fletcher
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 4:22 pm Post subject: Vincent Validates My Hypothesis |
|
|
Thank you M. Le Chavalier for your most timely post. You have summed up my argument very nicely in that you have captured the essence of what I have been trying to say in your characteristic French way.
It is not what we wish to do but what is possible for us to do. An opponent in armor or mail brandising a shield is a most difficult target to strike. Although we would like to target his vulnerable areas we will land a sword blow as we can. An armored target is more likely to be effected by a percussive blow than a cut. A straight bladed sword is more effective at giving a percussive blow than a curved blade because the force of the blow is concentrated in a very small section of the edge profile etc. I could go on but you have stated the argument more concisely and articulately than I.
Bon Chance Mon Ami!
Harry
To Study The Edge of History
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Cha
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: Vincent Validates My Hypothesis |
|
|
| Harry J. Fletcher wrote: | Thank you M. Le Chavalier for your most timely post. You have summed up my argument very nicely in that you have captured the essence of what I have been trying to say in the characteristic French way.
It is not what we wish to do but what is possible for us to do. An opponent in armor or mail brandising a shield is a most difficult target to strike. Although we would like to target his vulnerable areas we will land a sword blow as we can. An armored target is more likely to be effected by a percussive blow than a cut. A straight bladed sword is more effective at giving a percussive blow than a curved blade because the force of the blow is concentrated in a very small section of the edge profile etc. I could go on but you have stated the argument more concisely and articulately than I.
Bon Chance Mon Ami!
Harry |
I believe Vincent was talking about using percussive force when you had NO other options open. Not cleaving and bashing as a primary method or even secondary methods of using a sword...but that is what you do when you got nothing else left. And doing a percussive heavy blow that does little to the man underneath while exposing your vulnerable bits to their counter attack because you made such a bad motion gets you killed. Yes there are times when it comes up...but those times are rare and hardly definitive of how euro swords should be used.
Okay lets try this another way. I get a katana and I swing it around at water bottles and pool noodles. I use the wrong angle of attack so the katana cleaves and bashes (yes you can get a katana to do this...I have done this on purpose for demontration purposed before). From this personal experience, I conclude that all katana are not cutting and slicing weapons but cleaving and bashing weapons, despite being told by others who have studied the katana for years that this is not so. That is pretty much what you are doing now.
|
|
|
|
|
Bennison N
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mr. Cha... Sometimes it works better if you put more effort into trying to explain, instead of just picking on someone every time they say something. "That is pretty much what you are doing now".
"Never give a sword to a man who can't dance" - Confucius
अजयखड्गधारी
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Cha
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2010 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bennison N wrote: | | Mr. Cha... Sometimes it works better if you put more effort into trying to explain, instead of just picking on someone every time they say something. "That is pretty much what you are doing now". |
Well you do have a point...I donīt deny it. Although I am quite out of ways to try and explain myself that hasnīt already been covered...and since Harry is rather hard set on his conclusion, further discussion maybe moot...but then again, when did that ever stop a thread from going on in a message board .
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
| Posted: Tue 26 Jan, 2010 2:49 am Post subject: Re: Vincent Validates My Hypothesis |
|
|
| P. Cha wrote: | | I believe Vincent was talking about using percussive force when you had NO other options open. Not cleaving and bashing as a primary method or even secondary methods of using a sword...but that is what you do when you got nothing else left. And doing a percussive heavy blow that does little to the man underneath while exposing your vulnerable bits to their counter attack because you made such a bad motion gets you killed. Yes there are times when it comes up...but those times are rare and hardly definitive of how euro swords should be used. |
Frankly I'm not aware that we have much definitive information about how swords were meant to be used in battle in the early periods.
With a one-handed sword and shield, half-swording will not be really practical, and going for the gaps is problematic. The tip profile of the early swords is not well suited for piercing through mail. If you try to cut with a weaker percussive effect (with a curved blade or with a significant slicing effect), miss and fall on an armoured bit, it won't do anything at all to the opponent. This isn't a good choice either... I'd prefer not dismiss the percussive effect because it's one good reason to go for a straight blade, and something mail armour is not totally invulnerable to.
I guess the question is: what would you do with a sword against a mail-covered opponent?
My personal options would be, in order:
1) see if there is any soft part exposed and try to cut there (percussive, slicing and anything in between will work decently well there)
2) cut strongly to other parts sensitive to blunt force, hoping to unsettle the opponent, ideally while binding/opposing his own weapon
3) see if something opens up, repeat
If you use a more percussive cutting technique steps 1 & 2 are basically the same thing... So if something goes wrong in step 1, you are already in step 2, you haven't just wasted one strike.
With that in mind, what are the requirements for a sword in the early period?
1) being able to dispatch unarmoured opponents without any problem
2) being able to inflict decent blunt trauma to flexible armour
I guess if you seek a blade profile that does both you end up easily with a wide forward-weighted straight blade. Later on plate armour made point 2) moot, and thrusting more valuable, so you get backward-weighted thrusting blades (that will still cut well enough that an opponent without armour will die in one good strike).
Of course this is all heavily simplified  Metallurgical problems for example can probably explain other elements of the design.
Regards,
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Millman
|
| Posted: Tue 26 Jan, 2010 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Folks,
Although there's been a great deal of discussion about delivering percussive blows meant to do impact (as opposed to cutting) damage through mail with early-medieval swords, I think that the idea is probably a straw man. If you have a center-grip shield, it will be far more effective to deliver blunt-force attacks with that than with the sword. (I have no experience with arm-strap shields and cannot address their use.) The sword's purpose, under this model, would be to force the adversary to move his shield so that you create an opening for your shield-strike.
I don't want to derail this thread, but I think that postulating the use of the early-medieval straight (i.e., "Viking") sword as an item meant to deliver impacts against mail probably is wrongheaded.
Mark Millman
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
| Posted: Tue 26 Jan, 2010 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Millman wrote: | | If you have a center-grip shield, it will be far more effective to deliver blunt-force attacks with that than with the sword. (I have no experience with arm-strap shields and cannot address their use.) The sword's purpose, under this model, would be to force the adversary to move his shield so that you create an opening for your shield-strike. |
But why would your sword make him move, unless it creates a significant threat even on an armoured spot?
I agree that the shield is also good at impacts, but it does not reach as far, and is probably slower therefore less deceptive than the sword. I'm all for treating the shield as a weapon but not so much that the sword becomes reputedly useless as long as there is a bit of armour involved...
Regards,
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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