Which of our ancestors made the most sturdy, and effective battle ready swords

[MadSquabbles500]

Why doesnt olympic fencing allow you to move sideways and circle the opponent? It be more entertaining and be more athletic.

 

[SweetDaddySiki]

Why doesnt olympic fencing allow you to move sideways and circle the opponent? It be more entertaining and be more athletic.

Olympic fencing is ultimately derived from italian school rapier, which emphasized linear movement. Its actually much more athletic than non linear styles due to the need to lunge and retreat very quickly.

 

[SweetDaddySiki]

Dude, after just observing sport fencers, like I have been doing since posting that Rapier vs Longsword vid, I have to agree with you.

Granted, the épée weighs 770 grams compared with approximately 1 Kg for a rapier and these HEMA guys have heavier gear...

But still I would give no more than 3 months to a legit sport fencer to adapt to the rapier and I think that he would be a much superior rapierist than what I have seen so far (on vids) from HEMA guys.

Keep in mind there are tonnes of good fencers in HEMA.

Fencing is oriented towards gaining the point. Rapier is oriented towards not being hit. This results in a much more cautious, much less aggressive and athletic looking play. The average fencer IS better conditioned and more athletic, but there are very important differences in what is emphasized, and coming in with a fencing mindset will get you alot of double hits.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Olympic fencing is ultimately derived from italian school rapier, which emphasized linear movement. Its actually much more athletic than non linear styles due to the need to lunge and retreat very quickly.

What about quickly side stepping an attack and then lunging from a different angle? I guess Italian cities were crowded, and had narrow streets maybe.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

But I thought the Romans main killing method was get up close, jam shields together and stab away with gladius.

That was only one tactic they used. Sometimes they used phalanx style tactics as well.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

What about quickly side stepping an attack and then lunging from a different angle? I guess Italian cities were crowded, and had narrow streets maybe.

What I have read is that while the rapier was imported from Spain to Italy, the spanish method (which happened to be circular) was not imported with the rapier and the italian masters developed their method from scratch.

Maybe otherwise today's olympic fencing would be a circular sport and the linear character of today's fencing is the result of a random historical event ?

Another theory, but I'll let the experienced fencers answer that, is that when it comes to very quick thrusting weapons (like a rapier or épée), the linear movements are much more efficient and fast. Maybe you just don't have time in fencing to sidestep and counter at a different angle ?

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Keep in mind there are tonnes of good fencers in HEMA.

Fencing is oriented towards gaining the point. Rapier is oriented towards not being hit. This results in a much more cautious, much less aggressive and athletic looking play. The average fencer IS better conditioned and more athletic, but there are very important differences in what is emphasized, and coming in with a fencing mindset will get you alot of double hits.

Ok I see your point about the double points.

But isn't that the situation in épée when you are losing on points and can't afford double points ? Doesn't it get much more conservative because you have to be very careful to not get hit ?

 

[SweetDaddySiki]

Ok I see your point about the double points.

But isn't that the situation in épée when you are losing on points and can't afford double points ? Doesn't it get much more conservative because you have to be very careful to not get hit ?

I honestly don't know. I'm not terribly familiar with the rules and play of olympic fencing.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

I honestly don't know. I'm not terribly familiar with the rules and play of olympic fencing.

Ok. Well unlike the foil where the conventions of priority determine who gets the point when both fencers get hit, in Épée both fencers are awarded the point.

Therefore in Épée the fencer leading on points can fight very agressively, while the fencer behind on points must be very careful not to get hit, even if he hits his opponent. That latter case must ressemble the "not get hit at all costs" of rapier fencing that you are describing. It must also ressemble the mindset of a duel where one fencer doesn't want to shed his own blood,lol.

 

[Lemmy]

Olympic fencing is ultimately derived from italian school rapier, which emphasized linear movement. Its actually much more athletic than non linear styles due to the need to lunge and retreat very quickly.

right.
(italian fencing was the most effective, refined art of fencing while, for example, spanish fencing was probably the most beautiful to see, but it was not so effective).

also lunging can be useful in all combat sports and with a fencing base your lunges REALLY could do the difference (feet position is not so different from the feet position that a mma\mt fighter uses).

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

right.
(italian fencing was the most effective, refined art of fencing while, for example, spanish fencing was probably the most beautiful to see, but it was not so effective).

also lunging can be useful in all combat sports and with a fencing base your lunges REALLY could do the difference (feet position is not so different from the feet position that a mma\mt fighter uses).

Agreed. In MT or MMA sparring the lunging straight to the plexus has always been a go-to move of mine. Somehow I am pretty good with it. Maybe because no so many people use it.

 

[Doughbelly]

The relative merits of circular versus linear motion is an ancient and much debated topic in the fighting and martial arts, so there are multiple ways of approaching the subject.

Within the context of sport fencing - or for that matter, any abstracted fight sport - the rules are there to streamline the format into desirable actions. Even in kendo, which is itself very linear but still has very developed angled footwork compared to fencing, most side to side movement is just delaying, stalling or otherwise wasted motion. Sport fencing is abstracted to value the thrust. If you let guys move side to side too much, they'll waste time doing that when ultimately, they will end up lunging and thrusting anyway.

Within the context of weapons and fighting in general, linear motion is almost always faster than circular motion because the shortest path between two points is a straight line. The jab is faster than the hook, the thrust is faster than the cut. This is what fencing abstracts into its competitive format.

Within the context of human body mechanics, the body is set up to move most efficiently in one direction the best - forward. The human body is pretty much better in every way - stronger, faster, quicker, more explosive, more stable, more energy efficient, etc - when advancing. Then comes retreating (a linear motion) then to the sides, the directional efficiency of which depends on your stance.

Furthermore, modern sport fencing footwork (forward foot moves first to advance, rear foot moves backwards first to retreat) is not really good for sideways motion. All movement in all fighting involves two steps - the left, then right foot or vice versa (simultaneous movement is something that happens later). Advancing or retreating footwork immediately changes your range with the first step. The initial motion for side movement, either by a linear step (which is made awkward by the open hipped L shaped stance - you move better in any direction when hips/knees are closed and facing in the same or similar direction) or a circular step changes almost nothing about the target either in range or target profile. It's only the closing motion for a sidestep that changes much at all. This isn't that big of a deal in boxing or other forms of unarmed fighting, where motion can be disguised and amplified by upper body and head movement, but in fast twitch weapons fighting, it is too much of a delay.

Anyway, I could go on for pages about this stuff but TL;DR - forward linear motion (and backward linear motion) is most efficient for the human body and for fencing with a fast thrusting weapon, circular motion doesn't make any sense. (Early Spanish weapons weren't that fast.)

 

[esotamoc]

What I have read is that while the rapier was imported from Spain to Italy, the spanish method (which happened to be circular) was not imported with the rapier and the italian masters developed their method from scratch.

Maybe otherwise today's olympic fencing would be a circular sport and the linear character of today's fencing is the result of a random historical event ?

Another theory, but I'll let the experienced fencers answer that, is that when it comes to very quick thrusting weapons (like a rapier or épée), the linear movements are much more efficient and fast. Maybe you just don't have time in fencing to sidestep and counter at a different angle ?

I think the linear movement has a lot to do with usind the sword to parry rather than avoiding the hit making sidestepping not always necessary. I think the Italians first developed the 2 tempo parry riposte or at least spent more focus on that ststem

 

[esotamoc]

Anyway, the difference s between Hema and fencing are not as large as some if the hema community make out. Of all the activities they resemble each other the most . hema is still a sport just with different rules. If people took the competition in hema more seriously then it would resemble fencing in form and intent- is more modern professional training and bending rules to score a win. Mat East on suggested fencing scoring in epee could be improved by removing the double hit ,including after blow and limiting leg target. I agree with him but in the end not a lot would change- the same fencers would adjust their game and still dominate and fencers would use the after blow as a tactic to cancel out opponents attacks if they were leading the score. Hema and fencingvare both fun and should be complimentary.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

I think the linear movement has a lot to do with usind the sword to parry rather than avoiding the hit making sidestepping not always necessary. I think the Italians first developed the 2 tempo parry riposte or at least spent more focus on that ststem

Interesting. It seems so intuitive that a sword parry is superior to sidestepping in the context of thrusting weapons.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Anyway, the difference s between Hema and fencing are not as large as some if the hema community make out. Of all the activities they resemble each other the most . hema is still a sport just with different rules. If people took the competition in hema more seriously then it would resemble fencing in form and intent- is more modern professional training and bending rules to score a win. Mat East on suggested fencing scoring in epee could be improved by removing the double hit ,including after blow and limiting leg target. I agree with him but in the end not a lot would change- the same fencers would adjust their game and still dominate and fencers would use the after blow as a tactic to cancel out opponents attacks if they were leading the score. Hema and fencingvare both fun and should be complimentary.

I am a bit confused. What do you mean with after blow ? Like if you get hit you have one second to hit as well to cancel out the hit you took ?

Doesn't the removal of the double hit contradicts in spirit the inclusion of the after blow ?

 

[esotamoc]

I am a bit confused. What do you mean with after blow ? Like if you get hit you have one second to hit as well to cancel out the hit you took ?

Doesn't the removal of the double hit contradicts in spirit the inclusion of the after blow ?

in hema the after blow cancels out the hit or at least deducts the more valuble and more vital hit with a lesser target. in epee if you hit within 1/25th of a second you both score a point- unless you hit 1/25th of a second before your opponent. The former allows for more realism however both can be exploited in a sporting context.

 

[SweetDaddySiki]

As for linear vs. Circular..there are cultural aspects here. Sword play in Europe, esp the side swords that evolved into rapier was transformed by a work on fencing thoery called ""Treatise on the Science of Arms, with a Dialogue on Philosophy". The man who wrote it was Camillo Agrippa. Agrippa was an architect and an engineer. His work took the existing styles and rationalised them using geometric forms into a new, highly self consistent and very rational system of sword play.

That being said, Camillo was not a professional fencer, and his system was theoretical, not practical. Its emphasis on simplicity and geometry had a tremendous influence in european sword play, esp rapier. The italians applied the geometric principle and decided the straight thrust was the quickest path between points and began to optimist thier sword play around the thrust.

The Spanish otoh used geometry in a different way.Thier fencing art, known as Destreza taught that lunging straight at your opponent was dangerous, They emphasized circling footwork with a cut and thust play. They taught one had to control the foes blade in the bind and use very subtle offline movement to gain a superior angle on your foe.

There was much rivalry between the Spanish and Italians as to who was best. They were both highly regarded and well feared as duellists. But as time The Italian school was boosted by its adoption by the french, The French adopted the Italian school for reasons that can basically be regarded as Patriotic...the Spanish were the great enemies of France. As France grew preeminent their fencing spread to the rest of europe, while Destreza became increasingly mystical and abstract.

 

[BrainCandy]

I think that in an unarmored fight, a man with a very large shield and a rapier would have a significant advantage over a man with a two-handed spear. That matchup reminds me of the classic BJJ vs boxer - once the sword/shield guy traps the spear and closes the distance, it's over.

A skilled opponent could duel with a spear but that isn't how it built it's reputation. The spear was the weapon of mass infantry. They either fought with spear and shield or they formed up behind a shield wall with longspears. In such large scale combat, the rapier would not have been effective.

 

[Doughbelly]

As for linear vs. Circular..there are cultural aspects here. Sword play in Europe, esp the side swords that evolved into rapier was transformed by a work on fencing thoery called ""Treatise on the Science of Arms, with a Dialogue on Philosophy". The man who wrote it was Camillo Agrippa. Agrippa was an architect and an engineer. His work took the existing styles and rationalised them using geometric forms into a new, highly self consistent and very rational system of sword play.

That being said, Camillo was not a professional fencer, and his system was theoretical, not practical. Its emphasis on simplicity and geometry had a tremendous influence in european sword play, esp rapier. The italians applied the geometric principle and decided the straight thrust was the quickest path between points and began to optimist thier sword play around the thrust.

The Spanish otoh used geometry in a different way.Thier fencing art, known as Destreza taught that lunging straight at your opponent was dangerous, They emphasized circling footwork with a cut and thust play. They taught one had to control the foes blade in the bind and use very subtle offline movement to gain a superior angle on your foe.

There was much rivalry between the Spanish and Italians as to who was best. They were both highly regarded and well feared as duellists. But as time The Italian school was boosted by its adoption by the french, The French adopted the Italian school for reasons that can basically be regarded as Patriotic...the Spanish were the great enemies of France. As France grew preeminent their fencing spread to the rest of europe, while Destreza became increasingly mystical and abstract.

Great post with good historical perspective.