| Author |
Message |
Jean Henri Chandler
|
 Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 7:25 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Looks pretty good, you guys would adapt to I.33 or Marozzo style sword and buckler very quickly.
I think it's funny how the people in the background just ignore you until you get kind of close to one, and even then they just seem to sort of raise and eyebrow. You scandinavians are so laconic 
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
  |
 |
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Jean Henri Chandler"] | Elling Polden wrote: |
Looks pretty good, you guys would adapt to I.33 or Marozzo style sword and buckler very quickly.
I think it's funny how the people in the background just ignore you until you get kind of close to one, and even then they just seem to sort of raise and eyebrow. You scandinavians are so laconic
|
We have done quite a bit of I.33. Some of it goes into the sparring, other techniques are just to slow to do at this speed. (like most of the covers.) We separate hands and buckler to much, but the openings are generally to brief to exploit propperly, without dropping your own guard to much.
the I.33 1st ward blow is a personal favorite of mine... I must use it half a dozen times in the 30 sec clip. (the first one, me on the left.) It doesn't hit THAT often, but because of the range, and the fact that you step in behind your won sword, it is pretty safe, so you get a lot of tries. 
As to the laconic nature of the crowd, they are all fighters as well, and used to having blunt steel flying around their ears at speed. At the point where the videos are taken, we have been at it for a while, as well.
The guys actually paying attention are sitting next to the cameraman
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
  |
|
Gary A. Chelette
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I really want to jump in here and just scream. But I won't.
I have been in the SCA for 20 years. I have done Kendo. I have done full contact Kick boxing. I have a 7th Dan in Shoto Kan Karate and Sho Dan in Judo. I have done my share of live steel fights and some of them sober! 
This thread has been reduced down to who's group is better and who is more accurate.
Simple answer.
None!
I am 54 years old and up until 5 years ago, I was still in combat. Too darn old now.
All fighting styles have value. All styles teaches us us things we would not normally know about combat.
SCA Combat is full speed and full power. It has rules to allow us to get up and go to work the next day.
They have Horse to Horse combat now, though I have not seen this yet. Haven't been to a tourney in 5 years.
If you really want to know how real combat goes, join the Army. Shoot somebody, get shot at!
Sword combat? Be real.
If we did real full speed, full contact, steel on unarmoured body, we'd be in sad shape.
Each style put us just a little bit closer to how it was back then. We may never know how it really went, mostly because we can't just run around with sharpened blades and start fighting somebody. (They did that ya know?)
Today all be can expect is a glimsp of what it might have been in days of yore.
Think about it.
...and be good to each other.
Are you scared, Connor?
No, Cousin Dugal. I'm not!
Don't talk nonsense, man. I peed my kilt the first time I went into battle.
Oh, aye. Angus pees his kilt all the time!
|
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fully agreed.
The important thing is to be aware what you are doing, and its shortcomings.
And, in the end of the day, its about doing something you feel is worthwhile.
Everything else is an added bonus.
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Mercier wrote: | | I'm not going to get deep into this conversation since it hasn't gotten me far in the past in other places, but I would like to see, just once, someone attempt the signature SCA "wrap shot" with a sharp blade in a test cut. My opinion is it would fail miserably. Now I'm sure there would be someone out there that might do it over and over and try to perfect it so it might work, but more often than not I think the average fighter would bounce the flat of the blade off of the target. |
I don't have time to write in great detail on this, so I'll just list some of the points on it:
Alfred Hutton’s account from Colombière states the following: “They advance to meet each other, Chastaigneraie with furious mien and disordered steps, Jarnac cool and confident in the sound instruction he has received from Caizo. Several fierce thrusts and blows are given and parried on both sides, when Jarnac shifts his ground, feints a swashing blow at his enemy’s head, and so drawn up his shield to defend it, and as it rises dexterously passes his point behind the unfortunate man’s left knee, holding his hand in pronation [palm down, knuckles up], and with a quick movement snatches it back, bringing the sharp false edge into contact with the lower part of the ham. This slight cut startles Chastaigneraie, but before he has time to move Jarnac repeats it in a much more serious fashion, severing sinews, veins, muscles, and everything down to the very bone. Chastaigneraie falls to the ground, and Jarnac approaches him…” (Hutton, Centuries, p. 51).
Achille Marozzo, in his 1537 treatise (Chapter LXXXV), described the technique as un reviscio segato per le gambe, or a reverse saw cut to the legs. As Hutton pointed out, Achille Marozzo was “emphatic in his advocacy of the use of it” arguing that, logically, against an armored opponent the rear of the leg was often the only uncovered vulnerable area that could be cut.
The Sturzhau of the Lignitzer S&B plays is a vertical wrap, too, and while that refers to unarmored combat, of course, consider this: 1.) We *know* from the iconography that swords were swung at the sides and top of a helmet, so while cutting a helmet doesn't seem as though it would do much good at first glance, *they* obviously thought it would and the only thing they could have been going for was stunning their opponents. 2.) I (and others I know of personally) can generate enough force with a wrap to the back of the helmet to knock someone unconscious through a modern helmet lined with modern closed-cell foam--that's *much* more protective than the linings of medieval helmets, believe me. So if it can be done against superb modern protection I guarantee it can be done against someone in a medieval helmet. 3.) Therefore it naturally follows that the wrap shot can give the same results to the helmet that an Oberhau could achieve, and since we know that type of cut was actually performed in medieval combat (unarmored, but hold with me!) then it seems perfectly likely it was used in armored combat, too.
Is it listed in any Fechtbücher? Only Marozzo. The Fechtbücher all teach thrusts against men in armor... but we *know*, again, that swinging cuts were used even though they're not taught int eh Fechtbücher. Therefore it's clear the Fechtbücher don't reflect everything actually done in medieval combat, especially combat from the period before when they were written, which is true of all sword & shield combat in armor since there's none of that in the Fechtbücher.
As for your test cutting argument, with respect, it's not relevant. If you wrap to a helmet you're not trying to cut since plate can't be cut. You're learning to generate huge amounts of force to stun (just as they must have done with Oberhau to helmets). I would say, however, that since the Sturzhau of Lignitzer is a wrap in unarmored combat you should go back and examine your cutting in a different way because they obviously used it in period so it must have been able to cut that way. My guess is you believe a cut has to do much more damage to whatever test cutting medium you're using in order to win a fight than it really has to do; I've seen a number of people who think that. Please don't take offense at that, however, since I've never seen you cut and so can't judge--as I said, it's only a guess. As for cutting flat, as you suggest, that just takes practice. Even when practicing with a round stick the most force is still generated by the part of the stick where the edge would be relative to your hand, so I've always been taught to hit with that part of the stick. Moreover, I have practiced this with a steel sword and have found no difficulty at all in hitting with the edge ever time.
So, as I think you can see, the wrap was used in medieval sword & shield combat and was likely quite effective.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
 |
|
Gary A. Chelette
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excellent response!
I have used "rap" shots to the leg to great effect. Not because it was considered a legal blow, but because it damn well hurt!
Are you scared, Connor?
No, Cousin Dugal. I'm not!
Don't talk nonsense, man. I peed my kilt the first time I went into battle.
Oh, aye. Angus pees his kilt all the time!
|
|
|
|
|
Robin Smith
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm gonna agree with Hugh here. Even if the wrap would be ineffective against an armoured foe, it would certainly be useful to draw cut to the back of the leg, buttocks, spine, or neck of an unarmoured or lightly armoured opponent. It only takes a small amount of force to make a devastating cut to such a foe, and a severed hamstring would instantly end the fight...
A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
SCA wrap shots do not look anything like a draw cut to me, let alone a coup de jarnac. Maybe I'm missing something...
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
Gary A. Chelette
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | SCA wrap shots do not look anything like a draw cut to me, let alone a coup de jarnac. Maybe I'm missing something...
J |
You don't have to draw to cut. I've cut myself many times just by thumping the blade.
There is a cut and then there is a slice. If you want to dice, get an axe!
Are you scared, Connor?
No, Cousin Dugal. I'm not!
Don't talk nonsense, man. I peed my kilt the first time I went into battle.
Oh, aye. Angus pees his kilt all the time!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Mercier
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Knight wrote: | | As for your test cutting argument, with respect, it's not relevant. If you wrap to a helmet you're not trying to cut since plate can't be cut. |
That is a good point that for some reason, I never considered. Now I don't want to get deep into the rules of SCA combat, but why then, is a head shot considered a kill if you will only be stunning someone? It seems to me that it was never considered a stun as it was more of a kill and was just adopted as the preferred stance and attack. With the further study and practice of WMA, it is hard to get people to deviate to something else more preferred.
I don't know, I was only involved in the SCA for a few weeks, never officially being a member, so I don't try to understand how things are done or really want to know the complex rules and fight system. All I know is that it works for them and what I do, works for me. Hell, it has to be good if it's been done for 40 years!
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Meulemans
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Mercier wrote: | | Hugh Knight wrote: | | As for your test cutting argument, with respect, it's not relevant. If you wrap to a helmet you're not trying to cut since plate can't be cut. |
That is a good point that for some reason, I never considered. Now I don't want to get deep into the rules of SCA combat, but why then, is a head shot considered a kill if you will only be stunning someone? |
I think that in this thread there is more than enough conjecture and desperate attempts to refrain from emotionally charged outburst to last us all a good long while. I also believe that the old adage about "knowing your opponent" applies here, regardless of where one falls in the spectrum of SCA=good/bad. In course of this, I believe that delving into the actual rules of the SCA combat system would provide more substantive arguments for or against points being made. Relevant to this particular question I quote from the SCA's own Marshall's Handbook, section V:
All “fully armored” fighters are presumed to be wearing a chain hauberk over a padded gambeson, with boiled leather arm and leg defenses and an open-faced iron helm with a nasal.
This definition may change the perception of how a "wrap shot" may or may not be effective against an opponent so equipped. Effectively, it doesn't matter if you're in full plate harness, the blow is supposed be interpreted as if one is wearing maille, etc.
What I find fascinating about this unending topic is that a modern, contrived combat sport, such as the SCA engages in, generates so much controversy and heated bantering when its origins, development, and rules are clearly documented. Imagine then what this means to those of us trying to settle on points of combat systems now outmoded by centuries of non-use...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lee Craven
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can't really add much here beyond what has been said (except I think your Halfsword and the SCA article would go nicely here Hugh.)
As for early fighting styles Hurstwic does as good a job as I have seen at trying to figure them out though conjecture:
http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manu...hnique.htm
|
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The wrap shot always seemed really silly to me, until my friend came over to do cutting excersises. It never occured to me to try it, precisely because I thought it to be an SCA construct, an I has said as much on several occasions.
So we set up a milk jug, and he asked me how well wraps cut. I told him I had no clue. My friend, Russ, has been fighting for about 13 years, and he's a really excellent fighter and a joy to watch. He stepped up, threw a perfect wrap, and sliced cleanly (no splash) through the milk jug. I was pleasantly suprised, but as anyone who cuts will tell you, mulk jugs are easy.
Next we buy up a 2 liter soda bottle, which is much more resiliant. You really have to be properly aligned, and generate much more power to get through bottle. if you put in a halfhearted blow, the bottle will just bounce right off the stand.
He cut through the soda bottle; he did knock it over, but he cut clean through it.
So we put up a gatorade bottle.These are made from the same resilient material as a soda bottle, but thicker. These area royal pain (at least for a hack like me). Russ grit his teeth and gave it a good stout throw. It bounced. He tried again, it bounced again. There are limits to everything.
Getting back to the combat validity of the wrap, most wraps (in my limited experience) are thrown to the back of the leg, around the shield. I'd say against plate, or maile, you'd be wasting your effort. Maile is proof against most cuts, and thought the wrap can be thrown with suprisingly good force, it is not a power shot. At least not based on our completely unscientific test .
Against a gambeson, I wouldn't want to be the guy in the gambeson, but it might stop the blow. Anything less and I think you'd lose your leg.
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Henry Tobler
Location: Oxford, CT Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Posts: 704
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello everyone,
I think it's pretty clear that there historic analogues to some forms of what SCA fighters call wrap shots. The Sturzhau, or Plunging Stroke, that Hugh cites is one of them.
Where there might be a difference is in the general range these are used at. Now, I'm aware that 'wrap shot' covers considerable ground in the repertoire of SCA techniques, so I'll confine my remarks to one type that I've seen: two fighters bearing very large shields stand toe to toe and wrap over the shield to hit the back of the head or shoulders. Can this hit hard - sure -- very. The problem I see is that it might appear to be more effective than it might be in a battle, largely because of the restrictions on striking with the shield. While true grappling is unlikely in such a scenario, one could certainly use the relatively large shield at such range, were such restrictions removed. (Let me further note that I think it's a damn fine idea to restrict these!...talk about having your clock cleaned!!)
If you look at the Sturzhau, you'll see it's never used at such close range. It is however used in a tactical manner that somewhat mirrors the SCA tactic - the idea is still to get around the shield.
All the best,
Christian
Christian Henry Tobler
Order of Selohaar
Freelance Academy Press: Books on Western Martial Arts and Historical Swordsmanship
Author, In Saint George's Name: An Anthology of Medieval German Fighting Arts
|
|
 |
|
Gary A. Chelette
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gavin Kisebach wrote: |
Against a gambeson, I wouldn't want to be the guy in the gambeson, but it might stop the blow. Anything less and I think you'd lose your leg. |
I fight in gambesons and I agree with you. If it is thick enough, as they say in the manuscripts up to 3 fingers thick, I'd say it will at least really hurt! If it was a thin one, I don't think it will absorb it at all.You'd get cut!
A skirted gambeson does well sucking up the energy, just don't have it lay flat on your leg. Some dead air does wonders.
Are you scared, Connor?
No, Cousin Dugal. I'm not!
Don't talk nonsense, man. I peed my kilt the first time I went into battle.
Oh, aye. Angus pees his kilt all the time!
|
|
|
|
|
Robin Smith
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Let me add that in the SCA, you are allowed to shield strike your opponents shield, just not their bodies. So if your opponent is buttoned up behind his shield in a closed stance, you can make hard shield to shield contact. You may also use your shield to hook your opponent's and shift it to make an opening...
A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Peters
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I thought of a major reason why you don't necessarily see much large scale group sparring in many HEMA groups. In a lot of cases, it's not just a matter of wanting to only practice duels, but rather lacking sufficient members to have such scale battles. It's relatively easy to find a bunch of people to get together for a reasonably large scale SCA battle. I would often get together with between 6 and 12 of my friends, of whom only one was actually in the SCA, and have SCA style fights. On the other hand, few people want to seriously persue historic combat as a martial art. Most don't want to put in the effort required to do it. Many are bored to tears about basic things like footwork, guards, the sixteen cuts, guard transitions, and the like, even though they represent the foundation of the art. I know that many of the individual ARMA study groups out there are not comprised of more than 3 to 4 members. This makes effective large scale melees difficult at the best of times. If more people were truly interested in historic European martial arts, I imagine you'd see more large scale battles being fought.
|
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think you're absolutely right Craig, and I hope this changes. In an odd way this reminds me of the Windows/Mac arguement.
If there are WMA gatherings large enough to have some good skirmishes, I would love to go.
| Quote: | | Most don't want to put in the effort required to do it. Many are bored to tears about basic things like footwork, guards, the sixteen cuts, guard transitions, and the like, even though they represent the foundation of the art. |
You're right on about that. I wonder if this was the case historically. Were there more scholastic groups or individuals, who would have been the target audience of schools and books? Were there those who tought them frivolous? Do we have any records of thier opinions? Or did they get themselves killed for thier ignorance before they could write them down 
I know that there was planty of interschool trashtalking, was there anyone who rejected the schools altogether?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Christian Henry Tobler wrote: | | Where there might be a difference is in the general range these are used at. Now, I'm aware that 'wrap shot' covers considerable ground in the repertoire of SCA techniques, so I'll confine my remarks to one type that I've seen: two fighters bearing very large shields stand toe to toe and wrap over the shield to hit the back of the head or shoulders. Can this hit hard - sure -- very. The problem I see is that it might appear to be more effective than it might be in a battle, largely because of the restrictions on striking with the shield. While true grappling is unlikely in such a scenario, one could certainly use the relatively large shield at such range, were such restrictions removed. (Let me further note that I think it's a damn fine idea to restrict these!...talk about having your clock cleaned!!) |
Christian, I've done fighting where shield striking was permitted and encouraged and our experience is that it's not the problem you may consider it to be. Many times placing a wrap correctly is as much about timing as position: If, for example, you can fake your opponent into moving his shiled to his right side you have an ideal situation for a wrap. Likewise, it's very effective to use your shield to pin your opponent's shield as you throw your wrap which effectively prevents him from shield bashing you while you do it. Of course, a shield strike is one of the things you do have to be cognizant of when wrapping, but it's nothing like a universal deterrant.
What the shield strikes you mention *really* prevent is grappling. Many folks who've criticized the SCA over the years have complained (with a great deal of validity, don't get me wrong!) about it's lack of grappling. When shields are used, however, grappling is very dangerous because you open yourself to a shield attack. I find it no surpise, therefore, that in looking at the Manessa Codex we see lots of shield use and lots of grappling, but no grappling while using shields.
| Quote: | | If you look at the Sturzhau, you'll see it's never used at such close range. It is however used in a tactical manner that somewhat mirrors the SCA tactic - the idea is still to get around the shield. |
With respect (really--I'm asking, not taking you to task), Christian, how do you know that? Does it show up somewhere other than in Lignitzer (with arming swords--I'm aware of other instances with longswords)? If not, I would argue Lignitzer's play requires a fairly close attack in some interpretations. It all comes down to the part of the sword you're striking with and where you're striking. I've tried it at a number of different distances and have not found that closer or father away is better; both can be done and both lead well to the thrust that comes after the Sturzhau. Again, that's based on never having seen it in any other source--I am prepared to believe some other source talks about this.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Knight
|
| Posted: Thu 07 Jun, 2007 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Mercier wrote: | | That is a good point that for some reason, I never considered. Now I don't want to get deep into the rules of SCA combat, but why then, is a head shot considered a kill if you will only be stunning someone? It seems to me that it was never considered a stun as it was more of a kill and was just adopted as the preferred stance and attack. With the further study and practice of WMA, it is hard to get people to deviate to something else more preferred. |
Hi Mike,
The real problem is that the rules of the SCA were made up by people who didn't know anything about medieval combat. An Oberhau to the head is also unlikely to be a kill and must have been intended to stun. Many people in the SCA use a system of combat designed to reflect the cumulative damage created by battering at someone in armor. It's much more realistic and lends itself much better to experiments in authentic technique in armored combat.
Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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