What is the Definition of Fencing?

It would still be an error to put rapier's in the picture as early as the 14th century because they didn't show up until the 16th century and were not widely used even then.

I'm not crazy about the rapier. It is not what I'm envisioning. You have given more reason not to use it. Thanks.
 
Watching the video it looks like they've taken roughly a C12th style sword - which is about right for the Robin Hood period, and lightened the blade so they could apply C19th/20th fencing techniques. Rathborne was a sport fencer, so you have some sabre style moves going on here. Foil and Epee are tighter, but sport fencing is pretty false for a mimic of the real thing because you fight on a strip and can't circle, and for foil and Epe the legs aren't a valid target. The bit when Rathborne picks up his sword after falling down the stairs, and the exchange around the 2 min mark look very classical sport fencing in terms of footwork. Watch how he launches off his back foot and beats with his front foot as he thrusts. But in all honesty the fight is a bit of a mess watching it in detail. There's a fair amount of hitting each other's blades and not a lot of intent to hit the opponent. In reality, C12th swords would have been heavier than portrayed here, and used more for hacking, and you'd probably get more binds.

Watch the Duellists, Captain Alatriste or the 70's British Musketeers films if you want to see what it really would have looked like with fast, light swords.
 
Nice video. There's not a lot of single handed reference points in it and I've struggled to find anything similar for early medieval styles. There's a pair of guys just after the 2 minute mark that briefly do single handed sword.

@Juliana I think someone mentioned you practice HEMA. That's one form I've not tried - I've come from a fencing and dark age reenactment background. One question on the weapons - they look like they are lighter than the real steel equivalents with deliberately thinner blades. Are they? or are they replicas of a specific dueling sword?
 
One question on the weapons - they look like they are lighter than the real steel equivalents with deliberately thinner blades. Are they? or are they replicas of a specific dueling sword?

I don't know how to answer this; I can ask my instructor next time I go. I know all longswords used in HEMA fencing are supposed to be based on the weapons used between 14-16th centuries. The synthetic waster I own is pretty hefty - the steels some of my classmates own (and that get used in competitive sparring) are thinner, though the weight is the same. This is the steel feder a lot of my classmates use:

Steel Feder Standard VB

And this is the synthetic one I own:

Type III Pentti Longsword 50'' with Fuller
 
6b0b0f57-3ae9-4cc8-ba93-d100059cb3c0_1000.jpg

Fencing

~exit, stage left~
 
A thought has occurred to me and am wondering if it applied to the medieval and renaissance periods. In our age we have a habit of comparing things like cars (or in my case guitars or harmonicas). I like Martins guitars because they're more mellow than guitar brand Z that sort of thing.

Did the warriors of old compare one sword with another? Did they say things like, "No no. Sword A has a duller edge than Sword J." "Yes that may be true, but Sword J has a sharper point which makes it easier for to kill my foe."

Did they have their preferences? Or was one sword (or weapon) just as good as another? Was there such a thing as quality and did they talk about it?
 
I'm sure they would have done, and even if they didn't, it sounds right to me for professionals to do so. Beyond a really low level - ie basic survival - you have the luxury to decide that one tool is better than another, and a sword is a fighting tool, so why not?

This sort of goes back to the point I made about basing it on a later period (perhaps without the gunpowder). As cities got bigger and the structure of society became more settled and complicated, there was room to discuss things that were increasingly sophisticated. If you've got printing presses, you've potentially got books and sheet music, which in turn could lead to standardisation as one work is able to be produced in more copies. If trade routes are opened and made useable, you could establish a regular industry producing weapons, clothes and so on. So by 1600, you're starting to see books about the martial arts being written down and codified, along with military tactics, legends/history, ways of making things and farming etc. Sure, many of those would have existed earlier, but the more structure a society has, the more chance you've got of there being several shops in a city producing a range of musical instruments and not just one guy banging on a drum.
 
Did the warriors of old compare one sword with another?

I don't see why not. For example, the kind of metal used will determine how sharp it can possibly be, and if it needs to be sharpened often - these two issues are related.

There is a little bit of sword talk in Game Of Thrones and it gives you an idea. There is probably a lot more to it than just what you can see. I am no expert but just holding a sword in my hands gives me a feeling of weight and balance and I believe someone who knows their stuff would immediately get a good idea of many things beyond that.
 
It's possible they could:though I would expect the sword makers to be doing this
Did the warriors of old compare one sword with another? Did they say things like, "No no. Sword A has a duller edge than Sword J." "Yes that may be true, but Sword J has a sharper point which makes it easier for to kill my foe."
::where as the wielders might be inclined to say, just give me something with a proper heft and reach and I'll show you how to use it(oh and maybe one that doesn't break too early in battle might be a plus).
 
Swords are hugely personal once you know what you are doing with one. Even fighters of the same school have wildly different preferences. Most of what I do these days is dark age, but my fencing background leads me to favour a "pistol grip" kind of style because it gives you more control over the blade when you pronate or supinate (I.e. Twist), meaning you can throw in dirty SCA style back of the head raps and the like. So it means I prefer a sword with smaller quillions so I can grip it the way I like and I prefer the balance right on the quillions. Other people prefer a more hammer grip because it lets you put more strength through the blade for striking, and like the balance point a handspan or so forward of the quillions to put the power through the blade. I'm 5'10 and not massively strong but I am fairly fast, so I play to that strength. And that's before you even start worrying about the quality of the blade. I'm not trying to kill people when I fight (honest) but if I was I'd damn well pay attention to the quality of the steel and how well it held an edge. It also depends on circumstances. Swords are close on pointless in a shieldwall. You are either at spear range, in which case you are just a glorified target, or you are pressed close like rugby players, in which case spears get ditched and it's scramesax time.

When I was fencing there was enough variety in the class foils that I had a couple I'd always try to get at the start of the class.
 
I'm glad we can help. That's the whole point of a community like this. Fighting I can talk about. Horses, well, now there's a subject that baffles me :)
 
I don't have any horse questions right now, but I'll look you up when I do :) My current project is mostly set on ships so I've dodged the need for horse terminology. I have learned a lot about ship things though.
 
These guys popped up on my FB feed today. The Longsword one has had some criticism about being sped up/slowed down, and mixing various period techniques, but both vids have a nice amount of grappling, falling over and drama.

 

Similar threads


Back
Top