The Armour Archive

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2005 5:39 am**

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2005 7:24 am**

AllenJ wrote: I would argue that all sword arts are killing arts. Especially the ones seen in the time period the SCA covers. I dont know of any manual prior to the mid 1700 that advises how NOT to kill your opponent.

Try Silver's paradoxes of defense.

IIRC He speaks quite eloquently on incapacitating vs killing. Much of his bias toward the edge is based on the philosophy of defence not mutual murder.

Robert
(who does a little research, but still knows sod all in the grand scheme of things..)

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2005 1:45 pm**

Um...those aren't below the knee attacks, they're the end result of a bind...if you were actually practicing these techniques instead of looking at pictures, you'd know that. Also, notice how the majority of the plates show the guy with his sword pointed down is getting hit in the face? There's a reason Fiore says only a fool does that...I actually mentioned that there were 3 grappling plates in the I.33, so you must not have read my post. I didn't say that grappling was unimportant, I said it was unimportant in I.33, there's a difference.

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2005 3:02 pm**

Llywelyn wrote:Greetings,

ok, could use a few tips here. First off, I love greatsword, it is probably my favorite form. I use a fairly long one as well, so generally I have range on people. But...for a couple practices now I have been having trouble against one person in particular when he fights with pole. He has a low guard ready for thrusting, and he has range on me. Not to much, but enough. I cannot seem to beat him. If I get into range I have a decent chance but he usually gets me as I try to get in. I fight in a closed helm(and I will continue to do so, so don't tell me to change) and so not seeing the pole is part of the problem.

I am curious if any of your have any tips on how I can move into "my" range with relative ease, and what the best way to counter this low guard. He is almost the only fighter I have faced who uses it, and it has me boggled.

Thanks,
In Service,
Llywelyn

With out seeing the actual position of you nor your opponent my advice is limited. I can say that you can be either the boulder or the stream. The boulder settles in & deflects the stream around it. The stream slowly wears down the boulder with time. If you cant see his actual weapon look for where it should be. Attack & control his weapon then subdue him. Once you past his striking area maintain control & dominate.

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2005 3:40 pm**

Robert of Canterbury wrote:
AllenJ wrote: I would argue that all sword arts are killing arts. Especially the ones seen in the time period the SCA covers. I dont know of any manual prior to the mid 1700 that advises how NOT to kill your opponent.

Try Silver's paradoxes of defense.

IIRC He speaks quite eloquently on incapacitating vs killing. Much of his bias toward the edge is based on the philosophy of defence not mutual murder.
..)

As I recall, Silver does talk about incapacitating blows, but not as an alternative to killing. His favoring the cut instead of the thrust is in part related to the ability of a cut to end a fight - by taking off a hand, an arm, or cleaving a skull. Taking of an arm is not necessarily lethal, but it certainly tends to leave your opponent helpless - if you then choose to kill him. (If not, he might likely die from hemorrhage or gangrene.) I agree, Silver is most decidely against mutual murder - his philosophy is based on making sure you survive the fight. Whether your opponent is dead, or missing a limb, or has run away, is not so critical. Incapacitating a foe is not a goal in itself, but your survival is.

The Armour Archive

Greatsword vs. Polearm

Re: Greatsword vs. Polearm