Rapier vs. Heavy Training

Grace Dudley · Post by **Grace Dudley** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 5:20 am

I've been wondering about this more and more as I prepare to teach a batch of newbies about heavy fighting. Having both fenced and fought rattan, why is it that the first things taught to new fencers are footwork and range while the first things taught to new heavy fighters are how to hit things hard and hold up a shield? Or was I simply trained in a backward area of the SCA? I *still* have problems moving because the way I was taught to fight rattan had me standing there like my feet were glued to the ground and the concept of footwork was *never* explicitly presented nor was its importance ever mentioned. I had to learn about it much later on and then I was told that it was "intermediate" stuff. Huh? As a fencer, I stepped, lunged and recovered my legs off in the first six weeks. I didn't even get a sword in my hand until the second week of class *after* I had learned all the footwork drills and could practice them. This is "intermediate" for heavy fighters? No wonder new fighters get pasted like baby harp seals. It's easy to wallop a stationary target. Is this the way new heavies are taught in other areas of the SCA?

Footwork is to be the second lesson in our new fighter class here (right after Stretching as the first lesson). I plan to send them home with drills to work on daily and run them through the drills every single class before we start in on the week's lesson. Hopefully in six to eight weeks, they won't have to think about what their feet are doing and can concentrate on form and generating power without standing there like little pells.

Thoughts from other quarters of the SCA?

Grainne (trained in Ansteorra, now of An Tir)

Rev. George · Post by **Rev. George** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 6:42 am

You'll notice most of the SCA combat tends to be relatively static after the first blow. aquire target, Run up, whack the bejesus out of him/her, aquire new target. In betwixt, there is a lot of posing, and intimidation type stuff, but you dont see people do a lot of passing, or lunging, etc. When you do, if its done right, its usually a better fighter that does it. Question is: Is that fighter better because of the foot work, or do you have to be better to grasp the idea?

-+G

Cedric · Post by **Cedric** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 7:12 am

I have always thought that good footwork was essential to fighting. Of course, I did start out my martial training with Tae Kwon Do and Kenpo Karate, so that probably influenced me a bit...

Cedric

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 7:49 am

You are also dealing in differences of calibration and registration. Fence is to the touch - almost anything that gets past your guard is good, so you learn the easiest way to avoid the shot - not be there (footwork).

Offensively, it is generally most advantagous to maintain a long range (relative to your reach) since most kills are delivered with the very tip of the blade - until you learn draw-cuts.

Armoured Combat (rattan) stresses different things becuase of the different C&R - you can throw a shot that is too light - and the mechanics of a good blow are very important. Throwing improperly can at best tire you out too quickly, and at worse be injurous to you or your opponent.

Defensively, range for rattan combat is MUCH shorter. And while fence is a faster game, the reaction time available in rattan isn't much better. It is easier to learn to block with a shield, and doing so gives the new fighter more confidence, less trepidation about being hit - even though you can get bruised in fence, it's nothing like the good 'ol blunt trauma of rattan! Shield work gives the new fighter more confidence in combat (since they have something to "hide" behind), helping them learn to "stay in the hot zone" as it were.

Gee, this sounded better than "We always did it this way"....

Diolun
Midrealm
(Who has 4 Squires who fence)

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 9:50 am

I think part of the problem is that SCA rattan fighting in vary non-period. First the shields are too big in many cases OOP if you will. No one seems to have less than a 30-inch round shield, or a giant heater.

Second there allot of huge guy who will tire if they move too much. Knights fought and trained all day long in armor and were use to it, we of the modern age are not.

Third the SCA is vary "wacka a mole" in there sword play. They hide behind a shield and try to hit the top of the other opponentâ€™s head. Where are the leg shots? Where are the arm shots?

Forth people either have basket hilts, and if they got a true hilt they don't know how to use it. Not everyone does this but most do.

Alcyoneus · Post by **Alcyoneus** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 10:13 am

There is a great deal that can go wrong with a sword blow, so you need to learn the proper mechanics in order to make sure the shots land with enough force. S&S is the required first autorization here, so you need to learn how to work the two in harmony. Here, at least, it isn't too long before the footwork variable is added into the mix, but at the beginning it may be too much for some people. We move around a fair bit, unlike in the West (or so I'm told).

Don't worry Flonzy, I don't mind hitting your arms and legs.

Noe · Post by **Noe** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 11:48 am

Don't like big shields? Come out here to the far west. With a single exception -- a fellow here who fights spartan style -- shilds tend to be not much large than say a 24 inch round shield. It has quite a lot to do with the fact that we have to carry our gear by hand.

Hmm, strangely, considering that we are humping this stuff around on trains in backpacks, there is a _lot_ of plate and chain armour in our group. At our last practice, all four fighters who showed up were in various forms of plate armour.

------------------
The defining characteristic of fanaticism is the inability to understand why everyone else is not a fanatic.

Pietro da San Tebaldo · Tue Feb 12, 2002 1:50 pm

In our barony, footwork and movement are lesson #1. I think we benefit from a cadre of experienced fighters who also have martial arts and colegiate fencing backgrounds...

------------------
"Or, a pall inverted surmounted by an orle Azure counterchanged"
mka: Sam Pearce

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 2:15 pm

flonzy

Way to general statements you are using - you should put down the paintbrush...

Where I live, legs and arms are favorite targets - I problably leg 75% of my opponents during a tourney. The knight who trained me legs close to 80%+ of his opponents.

Most of the shield are around 26 - 28", but we do have a couple bigger ones - in the hands of the 6'9" and 6'8" fighters. Same proportion though. Melee is a different story - most of the shields here are shoulder to shoulder, and chin to knee.

I do teach footwork, and use it pretty extensivly in my style (with shield - either center grip or heater). However, without learning the proper techniques of throwing a shot and blocking a shot, footwork won't help you much.

Diolun
Midrealm

Androu · Post by **Androu** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 4:38 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by flonzy:

the SCA is vary "wacka a mole" in there sword play. They hide behind a shield and try to hit the top of the other opponentâ€™s head. Where are the leg shots? Where are the arm shots?
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In most SCA combat I've seen, arms and legs as well as the head were hit about equally. It does tend be very static however, especially the sword and shield combat. Since the lower legs are not targeted, you can approach very close to your opponent, keep your torso and forward thigh covered by your shield and try to beat your opponent to the punch or counter his attacks. When blows to the lower legs are not excluded, a lot more movement in and out of range is required to attack an defend.

Grace Dudley · Post by **Grace Dudley** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 5:22 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Irish:
I do teach footwork, and use it pretty extensivly in my style (with shield - either center grip or heater). However, without learning the proper techniques of throwing a shot and blocking a shot, footwork won't help you much.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think anyone was advocating footwork above and beyond proper form. My original question regards why *only* form is taught most of the time (that I've been able to see) and footwork not at all or only as a mention in passing (ala "You know *whunk* you would be *pang* harder to hit *thwap* if you *bop* were more mobile!") without any actual instruction as to how. This is not a set of natural things we learn in doing this. It has to be taught. Some of it can be picked up by watching others and some fighters learn better that way than others. For the rest, it's a long and uphill row to hoe.

I'd rather have newbies who don't *have* to think about what their feet are doing by the time they get to learning blows and defense rather than have them knocked back to nearly square one when (or if) you tell them that on top of minding what their sword and shield are doing, they now have to concentrate on their feet as well. Aside of that, where you are (range) and how you get where you're going (footwork) greatly impact what you're able to do with your weapon and how blows are thrown. It really stunk as far as I was concerned to have to relearn how to throw shots while mobile. The old static habits were really hard to shake and they didn't work while in motion. They still don't and I still slide back into them once in a while. Bleah. I want these new folks not to have to go through that. I'm just dismayed that this is the way most newbies are apparently taught and was curious as to whether it's SCA-wide or just local cluelessness. From the responses I've been getting, it seems that the answer may be "all of the above".

Grainne

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 5:30 pm

Small steps. I teach a brand new fighter a couple of small "bits" - how to throw, how to block. When they become a little proficient, I add the next "bit" - a sidestep or some footwork. I then show them how this bit works with the others.

A new fighter can only abosrb so much - so I give them little bits, and help them put all the bits into a bigger picture.

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Thu Feb 14, 2002 3:12 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Grainne:
 I don't think anyone was advocating footwork above and beyond proper form. My original question regards why *only* form is taught most of the time (that I've been able to see) and footwork not at all or only as a mention in passing (ala "You know *whunk* you would be *pang* harder to hit *thwap* if you *bop* were more mobile!") without any actual instruction as to how. This is not a set of natural things we learn in doing this. It has to be taught. Some of it can be picked up by watching others and some fighters learn better that way than others. For the rest, it's a long and uphill row to hoe.
Grainne<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're missing the point. It takes virtually no skill to touch someone with a piece of light wire, while it takes a tremendous amount of skill to hit someone hard with a heavy stick. As a result, when they're using wire you can ignore how to hit hard and move straight on to footwork, especially since that footwork is important for defense.

In fighting, it's important to teach newbies first to hit, then to block, then to move. So, as you can see, there are two very foreign activities that have to be learned *first*; that fact in no way, however, limits the importance of footwork or movement in sword and shield fighting!

The fact that some never learn it is simply the result of the fact that they go through the first parts of the "program" (not that there's anything so formal in many places) without ever going further.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

[This message has been edited by SyrRhys (edited 02-14-2002).]

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Thu Feb 14, 2002 4:16 pm

It takes virtually no skill to touch someone with a piece of light wire, while it takes a tremendous amount of skill to hit someone hard with a heavy stick.

Rhys, I feel this is at best a very uneducated statement, and at worst the conceit that armoured (rattan) combat is the "superior way".

There is no superior art, just superior practitioners.

BTW -

I don't see our game in the Olympics.....

Diolun
Midrealm

[This message has been edited by Irish (edited 02-14-2002).]

Grace Dudley · Post by **Grace Dudley** » Thu Feb 14, 2002 4:31 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SyrRhys:
It takes virtually no skill to touch someone with a piece of light wire, while it takes a tremendous amount of skill to hit someone hard with a heavy stick.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Having done both, I'll have to disagree here. All the forms use similar skills applied in different ways. Rapier and foil are very different from one another as are rapier and rattan. But they're not *that* different. I'm beginning to think that the heavy emphasis on getting to the sword and shield part before anything else is borne more of a hurry to get to hit things than it is of any sound training principle.

Grainne

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Thu Feb 14, 2002 4:39 pm

I am going to have to take up with Irish here SyrRhys. I fight both Rapier and Rattan and I feel they both take skill. Rapier is the more advanced weapon and those who study the two can tell rapier has advanced sword and footwork techniques that broadsword does not.

If you are debating with is the better weapon broad swords or rapier then you might as well debate if European or Asian swords were better. Thatâ€™s all on opinion and skill level.

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Thu Feb 14, 2002 4:59 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Irish:

Rhys, I feel this is at best a very uneducated statement, and at worst the conceit that armoured (rattan) combat is the "superior way".

There is no superior art, just superior practitioners.

BTW -

I don't see our game in the Olympics.....

Diolun
Midrealm

[This message has been edited by Irish (edited 02-14-2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think my normal (and justifiable) scorn for fencing has made folks take the the wrong way. Yes, properly done, even fencing requires skill, that wasn't my point.

What I meant was that anyone can hold a foil and stick it straight out to touch someone... that physical action is something that takes no skill. It requires a lot of skill, however, to really hit *hard* with a rattan sword.

And thank heavens our game isn't in the olympics: They would have to turn it into a game of tag, as they have with fencing (and I fenced in college), and that would ruin it. Besides, I like the way we judge blows now; it's a matter of personal honor, not the subjective opinion of a judge.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 9:34 am

SyrRhys

I see you have a vary typical SCA heavy fighter mentality on rapier fighting, that it is weak. It takes as much skill to be safe in rapier as in heavy. I am not in the SCA and I find SCA heavy and rapier weaker than I fight in both cases. In my society in rapier we allow cuts and slashing and our clothing requirements are not a strict.

In Rattan we have shield size restrictions. You cannot use a shield bigger that your time era of your persona used. I am a Landsknecht so I don't usually use a shield; I fight with a great sword or a pole arm. My shield is just a metal buckler of 18 inches not a 30 inch round shield of a kite shield. We also allow pushing and minor grappling. Static shield fighting will not win you the day with us cause we are to physical. But to defend the SCA we are also a small group. We have only 30 or 40 fighters in our kingdom so everyone knows everyone. SCA has to think of rules for a large and general group we are a focused group.

My point is not to bash the SCA it is to give some perspective on the rapier is for weaklings idea stickjocks have. Compared to my groups rattan fighting the SCA is weak, or is it? It is all a matter of perspective.

And as a final note fencing is as close to true rapier fighting as kendo is to cutlass fighting. Fencing is a silly sport.

Flonzy

[This message has been edited by flonzy (edited 02-15-2002).]

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 10:12 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by flonzy:
SyrRhys

I see you have a vary typical SCA heavy fighter mentality on rapier fighting, that it is weak. It takes as much skill to be safe in rapier as in heavy. I am not in the SCA and I find SCA heavy and rapier weaker than I fight in both cases. In my society in rapier we allow cuts and slashing and our clothing requirements are not a strict.

My point is not to bash the SCA it is to give some perspective on the rapier is for weaklings idea stickjocks have. Compared to my groups rattan fighting the SCA is weak, or is it? It is all a matter of perspective.

[This message has been edited by flonzy (edited 02-15-2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now that's really interesting. What group are you with? Where are you located? It has been my experience that SCA fighting is the hardest out there by several orders of magnitude, and I've seen a *lot* of other organizations over the years. It takes tremendous skill to land a hard blow, and no other group I've seen even comes close. What SCAdians have you seen? Maybe you've only fought newbies. Since it takes such great skill to land powerful blows, you must be very skilled indeed. Are you close enough to PA to come give my group some training?

As for my "typical attitude", I don't think you'll find my attitudes to be very typical of anything. SCA fencing is just silly, and hardly dangerous (unless one of their car antennas breaks!).

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Winterfell · Post by **Winterfell** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 10:58 am

SyrRyhs,
With all due respect, I have been in the SCA for ten years now. I have fought both heavy and light. So now that that is out of the way, let's get down to brass tacks as it were. First and foremost, the majority of SCA fighting is NOT historically accurate. It just is not. One of the main reasons is safety, the other is that when the SCA started thirty odd years ago, they did not have any idea how to fight in a true historical sense, and it is only until recently has an effort to learn from available manuals and to test them out become common. You cannot hit below the knee in heavy, as such that means that almost all the hits have to be on the top of opponent. Now in a real battle the first thing that any soldier worth his salt would do, as soon as a guy lifts his shield and ducks his head behind it, is cut him off at the legs. But I digress, as that is not your argument. Your argument is that it takes no skill to reach out and touch someone with a wire. Okay so lets look at that. First, footwork is one of the most basic and yet important things one must learn in order to fight well. Soldiers do not calmly walk up to their opponents and then literally go toe to toe with them wailing away until there is an opening. Fighters move in a fight. Ask any boxer and they will tell you that. But I digress again. It takes no skill to reach out and touch someone. Well it does take skill to reach out PAST someone elseâ€™s sword and THRUST yours into them. It does not make a difference if it is a broadsword, a claymore, a rapier, or even a little foil (foils, in my opinion should never be used for rapier style combat, that is not what it was designed for.) Unfortunately, in the SCA there are two prevailing styles. (Disclaimer: NOT all Stick Jocks fight this way.) There is the â€œwhack-a moleâ€

jester · Post by **jester** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:12 pm

When I was working with new fighters I considered it most important to teach them how to throw an effective blow. Without this skill they are just a target, stationary or otherwise. Once they have this skill they are equipped to take the field. That is important. We lose *a lot* of new fighters. One in three will stick with it, and that is an optimistic number in my opinion. They are not equipped to be good fighters, but that can come with time (as I always made certain to point out).

In an ideal world we would be able to teach theory, footwork, blow skills, etc... for a couple of months before the fighter ever steps onto the field. We have to work with what we have, though.

Beyond that, SCA heavy fighting uses a standard which makes the shield more effective than it was in all times and places. Large shields encourage and reward participants for aggresive, up-close action and make it less necessary for a participant to control the range. Of course, people who can control the range tend to do better which is one of the reasons footwork is an 'intermediate' skill.

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:44 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Winterfell:
SyrRyhs,
With all due respect, I have been in the SCA for ten years now. <snip>

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Go back and read the explanation I wrote. I said that even fencing as it's done in the SCA does require *some* skill, and that I was talking about the motion of swinging complex sword cuts as opposed to the simple mostion of extending a foil.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Winterfell · Post by **Winterfell** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 2:49 pm

Sir Rys,
I read your post all the way through.
My answer was inadvertantly buried amongst my reply, here it is:
"It takes no skill to reach out and touch someone. Well it does take skill to reach out PAST someone elseâ€™s sword and THRUST yours into them. It does not make a difference if it is a broadsword, a claymore, a rapier, or even a little foil (foils, in my opinion should never be used for rapier style combat, that is not what it was designed for.)"
Now you and I are in complete agreement in disdain for the use of a foil in 're-enactment combat". Foils do not even remotely begin to simulate anything near a rapier. (Don't even get me started on whatever crap current modern fencing is supposed to be. *grin*)
If your issue is that you do not see any real skill being employed by SCA rapier fighters, well then that means that what your watching is probably alot of inexperienced fighters poking at each other with foils and calling it combat. I call it bunk. (well I have other names for it but this is a public board.)
Anyways if you would like to know more about rapier combat and it's complexities here are a few links that should help.
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~wew/fencing/agrippa/agrippa_illus.html
http://www.kismeta.com/diGrasse/index.htm
http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/saviolo/saviolo_H.htm
Now there are also two books that have recently come out concerning heavier combat, they are seperate tranlations of Hans Tolhoffer, and I recomend looking at both of them.

------------------
"As long as there are fanatics there will always be heretics

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 5:15 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Winterfell:
Sir Rys,
I read your post all the way through.
My answer was inadvertantly buried amongst my reply, here it is:
"It takes no skill to reach out and touch someone. Well it does take skill to reach out PAST someone elseâ€™s sword and THRUST yours into them. It does not make a difference if it is a broadsword, a claymore, a rapier, or even a little foil (foils, in my opinion should never be used for rapier style combat, that is not what it was designed for.)"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then you didn't understand my post, because I agree with you completely. What I'm talking about is the physical mechanics of all the different blows one needs with a sword (forhand, backhand, wrap, offside, etc.) as opposed to the simpler mechanics of sticking your point out in a thrust. As a result, beginning fighters have to spend a lot of time learning the basic cuts and thrusts of the sword before they move on to learning to block, and only *then* can they start worrying about footwork.

Fencers start out with a simpler concept: Push the point into the other guy. As a result, more of the beginning training can focus on things *other* than the attack. Now do you see the difference?

I *know* it takes time and skill to learn to thrust home past a determined defense; swinging a sword requires the same (more, really since we have so many more ways to do it), but that's all later. First fighters have to learn the basics.

What I was trying to say was simply that; in answer to the original post, that that's why we see SCA training going the way it does.

If your issue is that you do not see any real skill being employed by SCA rapier fighters, well then that means that what your watching is probably alot of inexperienced fighters poking at each other with foils and calling it combat. I call it bunk. (well I have other names for it but this is a public board.)

You have that right!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Anyways if you would like to know more about rapier combat and it's complexities here are a few links that should help.
Now there are also two books that have recently come out concerning heavier combat, they are seperate tranlations of Hans Tolhoffer, and I recomend looking at both of them.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I've seen the fencing manuals you recommend. I have very little interest in them, since they are for a skill that has nothing to do with knightly combat, but I studied them just for completeness sake.

I have also read and studied Talhoffer (both the 1467 editions to which you refer and the more interesting 1459 edition--I have copies of all three), Ringeck, Fiore, I33 and Le Jeu de la Hache. I find some of these (especially Ringeck and Le Jeu) to have a lot of value, and the others to be somewhat silly; sort of like the "learn the art of the Dim Mak death touch in 5 easy lessons" books so popular today. Besides, even if they had validity, they apply almost entirely to unarmored combat and judicial combats, while my focus is on knightly tournament combat, something only very casually alluded to in these works.

But thanks for recommending them, just the same; I'm always trrying to learn, and always hope to stumble across something new.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Rorik Galbraith · Post by **Rorik Galbraith** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 5:58 pm

All of my new students learn footwork BEFORE they learn to hit. It does them no good to learn to hit something if they cannot get there to do it.

I have been in some type of fighting art for the last 40 years and every one started with the proper stance and footwork before ever going on to how to hit someone.

For those that think the SCA has no historical significance in heavy fighting...please remember there are only so many ways a weapon can flow to the target. It is strictly a matter of physics. Every cut, jab and poke has been thought of before, taught before and used before. I often show people who tout this SCA fighting has no bearing what each blow will do using a 'real' sword. Cutting through a 2 x 4 or through a 2 liter empty plastic bottle takes the same technique...you have to learn it properly.

Sorry, got on the soapbox...back to our regularly scheduled arguments.

------------------
An oath, like an arrow, can not be recalled once loosed....think well before uttering such bindings and then stand fast to them.

Alcyoneus · Post by **Alcyoneus** » Fri Feb 15, 2002 6:59 pm

To quote The Kensei, Miyamoto Musashi, there is no "wood-chopping stroke", or man-cutting stroke", there is only cutting.

I am one of the few in Calontir that participates in fencing (either in my backyard, or out of kingdom for obvious reasons). I easily understood what SyrRhys said about the differences in the delivery of force. Fencing, "Period Rapier Combat", or whatever you want to call it does not require any great degree of force because you are considered to be fighting an unarmored foe. A touch will do, no significant degree of power is required. Once the point gets past the skin (and bone in some cases), you are pushing it through water. The force used will not likely hurt you if you get poked in the knee. It is fun, it is a good change of pace from heavy fighting, and it is good training for florentine and spear. I'm using George Silver's stuff (albeit modified) for heavy florentine, and it is working pretty decent. Gotta try it against Sir Semjaka at my next opportunity.

The delivery of force for rattan is quite a bit more involved, as he keeps trying to explain. If he hit me on my unarmored knee, I would be done for the day, if not longer. Proper technique in rattan is very similar to proper technique in swinging a baseball bat (watch the explanation on tv sometime), while fencing is more like ping-pong or tennis. This is in regards to the necessary level of force, NOT skill. The few times I've swung a tennis racket I hit the ball too hard, too far- using more force than was necessary, so perhaps that is a good analogy for the force used in fencing.

Personally, I find "Period Rapier Combat" to be fun, although not quite as much fun as rattan.

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Tue Feb 19, 2002 10:10 am

Rorik Galbraith

I think the point Winterfall was trying to make about reenactment combat is that it is a dulled down version (real dulled down) of the real thing. The lack of footwork, adding shields to every era, no grappling, no lower leg shots, and the lacking in the proper use of sword guards hardly makes what most groups call reenactment truly historical. Any one can buy a sword and swing it, doesn't make it historically accurate to Knightly training.

I am glad to hear so many replies to say that their groups do teach footwork.

SyrRhys I hope you see my point in your comment about rapier. I feel the chance of a broken blade is just as dangerous and being clubbed while wearing armor. Also SCA does not allow real rapier fighting because it is too dangerous. No cutting or slashing makes it off line fencing, not historical rapier. On that I think we have all agreed. The only big difference in rattan in the group I am in and the SCA is the grappling, shield restrictions, and the greater use in blocking with the guards (rapier also uses this with the quillions) and we don't restrict weapons to knights. Knighthoods are different for us.

Flonzy

Rorik Galbraith · Post by **Rorik Galbraith** » Tue Feb 19, 2002 1:59 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by flonzy:
Rorik Galbraith

I think the point Winterfall was trying to make about reenactment combat is that it is a dulled down version (real dulled down) of the real thing. The lack of footwork, adding shields to every era, no grappling, no lower leg shots, and the lacking in the proper use of sword guards hardly makes what most groups call reenactment truly historical. Any one can buy a sword and swing it, doesn't make it historically accurate to Knightly training.

I am glad to hear so many replies to say that their groups do teach footwork.

SyrRhys I hope you see my point in your comment about rapier. I feel the chance of a broken blade is just as dangerous and being clubbed while wearing armor. Also SCA does not allow real rapier fighting because it is too dangerous. No cutting or slashing makes it off line fencing, not historical rapier. On that I think we have all agreed. The only big difference in rattan in the group I am in and the SCA is the grappling, shield restrictions, and the greater use in blocking with the guards (rapier also uses this with the quillions) and we don't restrict weapons to knights. Knighthoods are different for us.

Flonzy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Flonzy, I do not understand some of what you allude to. The combat is only dulled down as you say by individual ability not by the rules. When you see to accomplished warriors 'duking' it out at full speed and power, I fail to see where the dulling down is envolved. Perhaps in your fighting career, you have not had the opportunity to see this. I will agree, that the one shot kill of the SCA is bogus, but it is thier current rules even if some of us are trying to change it to a more period blow agknowledgment system.

Granted, SCA does not allow grappling (I wish they did. I agree with grappling so long, as Syr Rhys so aptly states, it is within the tournament venue...I would get even more easy kills when they attemt. Lets be realistic in this: Grappling is very ineffective... as is whacking below the knee except in certain instances. Striking the lower leg/feet is just not done that much contrary to hollywood visuals. Yes, there are views of armor which show feet and lower leg coverings....remember these people were primarily on horseback...that brings feet and lower leg into play. On the ground....it is just plain silly and opens you up to all sorts of nasty reprocussions in combat. If you attempt to grapple with me...you will die swiftly via my blade. I have only been hit below the knee twice in over 40 years of fighting in various martial endevors including weapons.

I say again...It does not matter what weapon you pick up and use, they all are governed by physics. With that said then, the strikes are just as real as if they were a piece of steel. I do not teach to hit with a club, I teach the proper method of sword fighting including the use of the gaurds/blades/pommels for deflection. I am not allowed in this game to teach the use of the pommel for attack because they say it is against the rules. I do teach the strike is the same whether the weapon be made of wood or metal. I teach the weapon, not its makeup. The weapon is nothing more than an extension of your body...use it as such.

I fully understand that the SCA will not allow full power blows...some around here will remember that I spent 6 months 'adjusting' or cooling my heels because I originally would hit with all my prior training and rip armor off of people...with a puny rattan stick. I had to back my force down by a great deal in order to play. Even with that restriction though, I teach all my students the proper way to use a weapon...then I teach them how to play SCA.

My ideas on light weapons is simply this: IF you can show me how it can be played with period type of techniques with as little resulting danger as I now have in heavy weapons, I am all for it.....if you just want to play 'sewing machine of death'...well it does not take a lot of skill to poke someone even when they are trying to poke you....and yes...I do play light weapons when ever possible so it is not just a predudice. I would demand the same requirement of light weapons I demand of my students in heavy....play in a period way with techniques I can at least prove via physics that they could have been and probably were used in the time you are trying to recreate. No matter which avenue you would choose to play...you must learn the basics of proper stance and movement before you can ever learn proper hitting techniques.

Oh and your last statement? I do not know where you hail from but I have fought in 5 kingdoms at one time or another and none of them have a knights weapon as you allude. I do know that there are no weapon restrictions in SCA having to do with knight or not knight...a knight or master at arms must be proficient in all of them for how else can he or she teach them to students? All students have an opportunity to fight in al weapons allowed by the SCA to knight or newby for ultimately the newby must learn them to progress.

------------------
An oath, like an arrow, can not be recalled once loosed....think well before uttering such bindings and then stand fast to them.

[This message has been edited by Rorik Galbraith (edited 02-19-2002).]

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Tue Feb 19, 2002 3:20 pm

Rorik Galbraith

The build up in weapons use is what I was referring to. I think if you want to learn pole arm 1st then you should be able to, and I understand in the SCA, though I could be wrong that thrusting tips are for knights only, and that I dislike. I fight with a Zweihander and a Katzbalger (a great sword and a short sword) and with no shield. If I joined the SCA I would have to start with sword and board, and I disagree with those standards.

As far as the sport being dulled down it is as I said, no grappling, lower leg shots, OOP shields, no daggers, no hooking pole arms, so on and so forth makes this a game not reenacting.

I think the German use of grappling while locked up and with the sword guards would be real effective in battle, and tourney situations. I wouldnâ€™t just throw down my weapon and grab my opponent; it has to be a well thought out grab at the right time to disarm your opponent and to take a kill shot.

One last issue I will address the issue of hitting hard and rattan. While I think it's a good system, rattan hits vary different that actual steel, and weights more. We are fighting more with a club than a sword, but thatâ€™s the way it is to be safe.

Flonzy

Rorik Galbraith · Post by **Rorik Galbraith** » Tue Feb 19, 2002 4:33 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by flonzy:
Rorik Galbraith

The build up in weapons use is what I was referring to. I think if you want to learn pole arm 1st then you should be able to, and I understand in the SCA, though I could be wrong that thrusting tips are for knights only, and that I dislike. I fight with a Zweihander and a Katzbalger (a great sword and a short sword) and with no shield. If I joined the SCA I would have to start with sword and board, and I disagree with those standards.

As far as the sport being dulled down it is as I said, no grappling, lower leg shots, OOP shields, no daggers, no hooking pole arms, so on and so forth makes this a game not reenacting.

I think the German use of grappling while locked up and with the sword guards would be real effective in battle, and tourney situations. I wouldnâ€™t just throw down my weapon and grab my opponent; it has to be a well thought out grab at the right time to disarm your opponent and to take a kill shot.

One last issue I will address the issue of hitting hard and rattan. While I think it's a good system, rattan hits vary different that actual steel, and weights more. We are fighting more with a club than a sword, but thatâ€™s the way it is to be safe.

Flonzy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Flonzy: Ok, no daggers? Not true. The tradition of having someone authorize in sword and board first is just that a tradition not a hard and fast rule. It is done because it is by and far away the easiest of the methods to become somewhat proficent in quickly and safely. I authorized in bastard sword first in Drachenwald (old FDR, Germany)and then went on to defeat all there. I had 'played' with a single two handed blade for over 10 years at that time so it was no big deal. If your area is pushing sword and board first, that is just normal. It is not a hard and fast rule by any means.

I agree the oop shields are a bit of a dander, but they are here currently and until we as a whole may convince others to change, they will remain. I currently use a round of about 22 inches very similar to the old hoplite style but used in the 10th century also. I also use a center grip 20 inch round again used in the 10th century. For me they are period. I don't readily agree with the indestructable shield, but that is the current ruling. I have played with destructable shields and it is quite a bit of fun, but messy what with parts going every where.

Thrusting tips are for everyone who wishes to use them and can demonstrate proficency/safety when attempting the use.

Hooking pole arms? No problem...I have two and they are very effective at snatching a shield or weapon away from my target.

Oh, by the way...the SCA is NOT RE-Enacting, it is recreation (another form for fun). It is supposed to be educational and when people apply themselves to actually re-creating the old ways and crafts, it can be. It is definetly not a re-enactment although often times I wish it were. Having done both...re-enactment is so much easier due to the specifics of time and place and people in re-enactment vs the generalizations (often very bad generalization) of our game. Having said this...it is still the best and probably the closest re-creation of battle when done properly of any of our myriad of games we now have to choose from.

I have fought with steel, I have fought with rebated, I have fought with wastes, I have fought with rattan. If you wish to see what real fighting is closest to stick with rattan at full power...find someone like Conn and watch him fight with rattan...it is a sight few have the ability to keep up with. I know....I have fought this man more than once and I have nothing but the highest admiration for his ability on the field. I have also crossed blades with some of the rest of the people here and some of them are not to be trifled with at any cost. As I said before...dull? I do not think so. The weapon is just a part of the fight...the warrior is what 'dulls' or 'sharpens' the combat be it steel or rattan.

Please, stop using the steel vs rattan BS. This is so bogus! First, steel fighting has more rules than any rattan fight and you as a fighter can never make full contact and pull everything. When I hit you with rattan, there is absolutely no 'lighting' up the blow or pulling envolved. That weapon is coming in in the closest approximation of what a real strike with a real sword could be and still not kill my opponent.

It is pattently false assumtion that properly trained full powerr rattan fighting is not realistic. This only applys if you are wearing the proper period armor mind you...not the silly SCA minimum crap. Armor was made to repel steel weapons therefore wearing it properly will allow you to stay on your feet and play this game.

Rattan only transmits a small precentage of the strike's force, but it is more than enough to break bones through armor if applied properly. My steel sword and my rattan sword weigh exactly the same...they are balanced exactly the same and when fighting against maille, they result in remarkably the same type of dammage. Maille removes the cutting part of a sword and makes it into a very fast moving club. Rattan is already a very fast moving club.

Please do not think I am defending the SCA. I will be the first to admit they do things really weird sometimes..oftimes. I, like Rhys, Conn, Trevor, Richard, Raim y Hynndll, and others work in our own way to subtley change the way the SCA does things so that one day....maybe that bit about being an educational orginization will ultimately ring true. But I still want people to enjoy what they are doing...I just want to show them they can do it more correctly based on research and still have just as much fun.

Sorry, I got off track here.

What was this? Oh yeah, rapier vs heavy training and why foot work is taught in one and not the other.....it isn't. Foot work must be taught in both and must be mastered before good solid blows can be administered....in my own opinion of course. Your milage may vary

------------------
An oath, like an arrow, can not be recalled once loosed....think well before uttering such bindings and then stand fast to them.