Move Slow, Learn Fast: Another Look - Part I

Greetings,

The following is the first of three parts of this subject. I will apologise to my dear reader as these are quite long. This was the only way for the appropriate information to be included in the document as a whole, and to not drag it out into more parts. Unlike my regular blogs, while this part will appear on its usual monthly date, the following parts will appear one week after one another so that you are not kept waiting for the next part. This is a subject that has been spoken about previously; it is now presented with more detail and new evidence.

Cheers,

Henry.

Introduction

          Those regular readers of my blog, “A Fencer’s Ramblings”, or those who have bought my book, Un-Blogged: A Fencer’s Ramblings (2019), will note that this subject has been discussed before, with a similar title. This investigation is a much more in-depth discussion of the subject with evidence from neuroscience and other subjects supporting the findings.

          The subject of slow training is one which is of interest because it forms a vital part of discussions of many different forms of training in many activities. It has great advantages to those who engage in it as it allows the participants to focus on the techniques and hone the accuracy of these techniques to ensure that the correct methods are remembered. The subject of “muscle memory” appears in the subject of training in many disciplines and also is evident in the area of swordplay, and will be discussed in some detail here. Slow training enhances the process of gaining “muscle memory” and aids the participant in gaining the correct techniques.

          The bibliographical discussion aims at describing the sources which have been used throughout the investigation. Demonstrating the relevance of the sources to the investigation, even though they come from a wide range of disciplines not necessarily related to swordplay. Such a discussion reinforces future arguments and discussions which are made throughout the investigation.

          All too often participants focus on the physical aspects of training and forget the connection with the mind. This part of the investigation is intended to highlight the important connection between the body and mind before a deeper discussion of the operation of the connections is made.

          A discussion of the process of learning and integrates some of the points made in the connection between the body and the mind. It introduces some of the important aspects of neuroscience which are applicable to the learning of motor skills. Such information is made in a format which it is easier to understand than a deep discussion of all of the aspects of neuroscience applicable. The focus is its applicability to motor skill learning and this process. This information is most useful in understanding muscle memory and how it works.

          Muscle memory is a concept which has been discussed by sports practitioners and theorists for an extended period of time, i.e. the idea that if a person practices something enough it becomes almost a natural reaction. It is only more recently that science has discovered that this is actually the case, and that there are actual structures in the brain being built. The discussion of muscle memory examines some of the concepts and then discusses how old techniques are difficult to remove and new techniques need to be repeated in a constant and consistent fashion to be embedded.

          For some speed is an obsession in fencing. It would seem to be the prime motivator of their game. Speed is an asset, but it is not the only way in which a fencer should attempt to succeed. There are other elements of fencing which are more significant. The development of accuracy of technique is always a greater asset as when this is developed it is of greater use. The best way to develop this is through slow training.

          Slow training is challenging and it will seem tedious to some, but it is actually a more efficient way of training for speed than just attempting to perform actions more and more quickly. Slow training develops precision in the action. This precision leads to efficiency and it is here that true speed is developed. Slow training takes actions and examines them closely, removing issues so that the most accurate action is practiced.

Bibliographic Discussion

          Seven of the articles which have been used in the following investigation concerning slow training, and will be discussed below, are not directly related to fencing, swordplay. It could be claimed on this basis that there is nothing appropriate to be read about the subject, which would be incorrect. To find information about the subject of slow training and its related subjects it is necessary and useful to look a little further afield to address the subject properly.

Icasas’ (2015) “Practice Slow, Learn Fast” on his How to Suck Less website is a blog discussion about slow training and its advantages as taught in the Oriental martial arts. He gives the reasons for slow training and the reasons why it is important to the development of the student. There are a lot of similarities between the Oriental and western martial arts in their methods of training. Further, the ideas which Icasas presents are applicable in their form and application due to the commonalities of the core principles, the same of which can be said of all martial arts.

          Again, Caile’s (2017) “Viewpoint: The Power of Slow” on the FightingArts.com website gives a discussion of the advantages of slow training in the martial arts. This is focussed on the martial arts of the Orient and is aimed at promoting the use of slow training for the promotion of accurate techniques. The same applies here as all forms of martial arts are based on Time and Distance, thus the methods of training also have much overlap as well. It is the foundation principles which can be used to examine the development of skills.

           Ox’s (2016) “Slow in practice means fast in combat” on the MultiBriefs: Exclusive website is an article about firearms training and the use of slow training in combat training. It describes the advantages of slow training in an actual situation and discusses the use of the same training in other sports as well. He also connects some of the appropriate terminology with regard to brain function. This connection between the common language and the appropriate medical jargon is most useful, then there is something to build on, as will be seen in the following articles. The importance of accurate actions in combat with firearms cannot be understated. These principles can be applied to the use of the sword, having the commonality of both being weapons and both having precision in their actions for high levels of skill. This latest article would seem to be stretching the field of possible research to its limit, associating firearms training with swordsmanship, but the principles of training remain the same. Adding knowledge from modern medicine to understand what is actually happening in the brain can only be an advantage, thus even further afield the net can be stretched.

Petrosino’s (2018) “Training to Build New Neural Pathways” on the Elite FTS: Columnist website is an article related to weight-lifting. It discusses the use of the brain in gym-training for the development of neural pathways for the development of correct training patterns and techniques. This is a discussion of the deep connection between the actions of the body and the development of the neural pathways which control those actions. This mental approach, applied to weight-lifting, can be applied to fencing. The information about brain function increases understanding of the processes involved.

Duke’s (2015) “Changing Neural Pathways” on the SportEds.Com website is a discussion of neural pathways and uses the action of practicing and developing a better golf swing as an example. It discusses how neural pathways develop in the brain and what is required to overwrite old ones and properly develop new ones. Neural pathways are what are commonly referred to as “muscle memory” as can be seen it is actually in the brain not in the muscles. The golf swing is used as an example but a thrust, cut or parry could also have been used, and the same would still apply. Simple skills need to be developed and focus needs to be maintained to truly retain skills.

Halo Neuroscience’s (2016) “The Athlete’s Guide to the Brain: Motor Skill Learning” and “The Athlete’s Guide to the Brain: Hyperplasticity” (2016a) are both primarily promotional material designed to promote the training programs and products which are presented by Halo Neuroscience. The former discusses how the brain attains and retains skills, describing some the actions of the brain using the appropriate jargon associated. The latter discusses information about how the brain operates in the acquisition of motor skills and the development of neural pathways. These both have a general sport focus. Both of these articles discuss the development of skills which is appropriate to the discussion. The information about how they are developed is most useful as it gives understanding how and why the skills develop the way that they do.

Girard’s (1997) Actors On Guard: A Practical Guide for the Use of the Rapier and Dagger for Stage and Screen is evidently a manual designed for fight directors and actors. Its information is related to the subject as it addresses weapons and subjects which are clearly associated with swordplay and its use. The information from here is about the training of the actor in the use of these weapons.

Evangelista’s (1996) The Art and Science of Fencing is a fencing manual addressed to the modern fencer and as such is directly addressing the subject of fencing, but may seem not so much to the historical fencer. What needs to be made clear here is that there is a commonality which is present between arts of the sword, regardless of its form. Such information about is training is thus useful to all scholars of the blade.

Two sources which will be used are directly applicable to those who study the historical weapons are Windsor’s (2013) The Swordsman’s Companion: A Modern Training Manual for Medieval Longsword, and Farrell’s (2014) Scottish Broadsword and British Singlestick. The information drawn from these directly addresses the training of historical weapons and thus is most appropriate for historical swordsmanship. In the same category of appropriate address is my own recently published, Walker, H. (2019) Un-Blogged: A Fencer’s Ramblings, which directly addresses both the subject of historical swordsmanship and also the concept of slow combat and its use in training. Indeed this investigation is a direct expansion of one of the articles found in this book, and used in this discussion.

In this discussion it is vital that information is drawn from as many sources as possible to present both theory and practice of slow movement training to demonstrate its application and advantage. This discussion of the sources is designed to point out the applicable nature of training methods of other sports and pursuits to historical swordsmanship. Of necessary nature is the theory presented to reinforce the practice which is presented throughout the various pursuits noted and, of course historical swordsmanship.

Mind and Body

“Bringing mind and body together on the fencing strip is the ultimate goal of fencing. ... A blending of thought and action supercedes all true effectiveness on the fencing strip. Touches, therefore, become the expression, the outcome, of superb fencing,” (Evangelista, 1996:169)

           Fencing as only a physical game is very limiting; it is actually a game of mind and body. Both have their parts to play for the fencer to achieve their goals. To be sure many of the skills of the fencer will be written into the fencer’s muscle memory so they do not have to think about these actions, but the mind still has its role to play. There are still observances to record and plans to be made. The problem is that many people forget the mind and only look and the physical aspects and not only in fencing.

“All too often, I see people missing the importance of thinking about the muscle-brain connection when it comes to training. And that’s a bit of a shame because creating neural pathways that allow you to train and move correctly is a component of making gains.” (Petrosino, 2018)

          Petrosino (2018) is discussing gym training and weight-lifting and a person would be surprised that there would be any involvement of the mind at all in that particular sport. Parallels can be drawn between fencing and the points that the author is making, in both cases neural pathways, what most people call “muscle memory”, are a function of the brain, not the body. They are written by the actions of the body, but they have to be conscious actions to be written correctly and accurately. The actions have to be thought about; mind first, body second.

“it is important from the beginning for you to establish the habit of “think then do.” What this means is that you visualize and understand a technique or action before physically committing to it. Think about a technique, know what you are about to do is right, and then do the action.” (Girard, 1997:6)

          The idea of thinking and then doing is presented here by Girard (1997) in his stage fighting manual for the use of rapier and dagger, meaning that it crosses over to an area which is familiar to fencers and those involved in swordplay. For the actor, this idea is used because it means that they are thinking about what they are doing first, and then doing it, for safety reasons. The fencer can apply the same sort of approach for training purposes, and tactical reasons; visualising what they want to perform and what the correct timing is and then performing the action. The mind element in skill acquisition cannot be avoided; this is how skills are gained, not by training only the body, but by training the brain.

“neuroplasticity is what allows for the acquisition and retention of motor skills. By motor skills, we are referring to finely coordinated muscle movements such as batting, putting, and free throws.” (Halo Neuroscience, 2016)

Motor skills, like the ones used in all forms of swordplay are gained through the virtue of neuroplasticity. Only through this can we create and modify neural pathways to learn new skills and to correct mistakes in others learnt previously. To reject the use of the mind in the pursuit of swordplay and to rely on the acquisition of skills through purely physical means is a limited approach. Understanding the reasons for this is an even greater asset.

The end of Part I

The Bibliography will be found at the end of Part III.

Of Wolf and Dog

Greetings,

The following discussion is a little off my usual discussion of fencing subjects, but it does apply to the broad general area of fencing. The following is a discussion of Jack London's White Fang and how its themes and concepts can be applied. While not exactly aimed at fencing it does discuss training in fencing and also concepts around expectations and education, two subjects which are related to fencing.

The novel White Fang has been used by many people to explain many different things. For myself, it is one of my favourite books that I enjoy reading because it immerses you in the place and period in which it is set and also shows you somewhat the life of one wolf from pup to full-grown, and the interesting experiences that he had along the way. There is an animated version of this story available now on Netflix, which hits most of the main plot points, but misses much of the detail which is contained within the book. It also, as can be expected, changes elements within the story as well.

The first question that White Fang asks is how much of you is wolf and how much of you is dog? Or to put it another way, how much is driven by your instincts and how much of you is driven by what you have learnt at the hands of others? The same question could also ask how much of you is free and how much of you is tied to expectations and impositions, many which are imposed by the self?

We would all like to think that we are more wolf than dog, that we are free to do what we want when we want, but this is really not the truth. We are tied by our expectations of our society, and impositions made by ourselves and our own egos and what we want out of life, which tie us to society. The freedom of the wolf is an illusion that we would like to hold, but many cannot grasp.

Other aspects of the dog show themselves, our education, our further learning at the hands of other education and being part of societal systems. All of these things make us good members of society, good dogs. To rebel against these, to become the wolf, is to threaten ourselves with the potential of becoming outcasts, to stand alone, something which our gregarious nature and ego-financial-driven selves are somewhat afraid of. We admire the rebels in our midst, those who stand alone, but do not join them. Sometimes we need to stand alone, because it is the right thing to do.

In the story, White Fang spends some of his early years in the wild. Then with his mother, Kiche, becomes a sled-dog for an Indian named Gray Beaver. He is trained in this role. He does not get along with the other dogs in the tribe, his mostly-wolf self shows too much. He fights the other dogs to defend himself and place himself on the top of the pack. But he is accepted by Gray Beaver and thus works for him. Later, through some trickery White Fang is sold to “Beauty” Smith and is trained as a fighting dog. He is beaten and set upon other dogs. The fights are vicious and all that White Fang learns is how to fight and kill the dog that is in front of him. Eventually he is taken by Weedon Scott who heals him after a dog-fight and then teaches him another way; that he can live without fighting, or at least that fighting should only be reserved for enemies.

White Fang’s story shows many fights with other dogs who refuse to accept him. In some instances it is to prove that he belongs and others it is because it is what he was trained to do. Some instances are because it is what he is. His early experiences are of rejection from other dogs, these are his formative years and they leave an imprint of not being wanted by other dogs. The result is he defends himself against them and establishes his dominance. This fighting ability pure and raw is taken by “Beauty” Smith and harnessed and let loose on other dogs for money. Weedon Scott wants something else from White Fang, to show him another way; that he can be accepted and that fighting is not the only way to be accepted. He learns from these experiences that he can be accepted and that fighting is not the only way to fit in.

What we must all ask ourselves is in our teaching and interactions are we acting like “Beauty” Smith or Weedon Scott? Are we taking someone at face value and just accepting everyone else’s view of them, or are we forming our own opinion? Are we simply harnessing one ability or are we really developing a human being? This is a question that trainers in all forms of martial arts must ask. What sort of impact is the training having on the individual? Is it perpetuating a cycle or is it doing the best for the individual?

As trainers of martial arts we should all be seeking the improvement of our students, in all senses of the word. We should not just be honing their fighting abilities, but we should also be examining other aspects as well. The social aspects of the art that we teach should be a serious consideration, as the students will learn everything from their teachers. If you teach in a gung-ho, “anything for a win” fashion, then that is what the students will take away. If you teach in an honourable, victory by art and skill rather than pure force fashion, then that is what the students will take away.

I recommend White Fang to anyone as a good read, and a book which will probe thoughts. The themes and ideas which the author presents are some which need to be considered. The story itself is well-written, primarily from the point of view of the protagonist wolf-dog White Fang, which is an achievement in itself, it describes scenes which will make you think.

Cheers,

Henry.

A Sword is a Sword

Greetings,

With no surprise, especially considering the title of the article and the blog, this article is about swords. But it is not just about them as objects alone, singularly, or pointing out one type of sword. It is an examination of swords in general. People, when they discuss sword, especially if they have anything to do with them in hobbies or study, are quick to separate and isolate them by function, culture and type. This discussion is designed to break down some of those barriers, to look at swords as swords.

The discussion which follows is more curatorial than social or practical, though both social and practical elements will come into the discussion. It is difficult to discuss swords without swordsmanship. To attempt such would be like attempting to discuss cars and their performance without discussing driving. There will not be a history of the sword, nor will there be any discussion of any particular type of sword, in fact this is exactly what this discussion is trying to get away from. The purpose of this discussion is to present the similarities between swords, rather than their differences so that they can all be appreciated with equal worth.

Definition

The Oxford dictionary defines a sword as a noun, "A weapon with a long metal blade and a hilt with a hand guard, used for thrusting or striking and now typically worn as part of ceremonial dress." (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sword). The Cambridge dictionary defines it as "a weapon with a long, sharp metal blade and a handle, used especially in the past" (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sword). Finally, the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as "a weapon (such as a cutlass or rapier) with a long blade for cutting or thrusting that is often used as a symbol of honor or authority" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sword).

All define the sword as a weapon, all define it as having a long blade. Interestingly, in two of them they specify a metal blade. Two relegate the weapon to the past, while the other attributes symbolic meaning to the weapon, thus giving it some use in the present. What will be noted in all of the definitions is that they are very rudimentary, though they do have some specificity to them. Depending if one or another of these definitions is chosen, some types of sword may actually be not included in their definition. The most extreme examples would be the non-metalic swords used by some islanders and also pre-colonial peoples. Care must be taken in a definition.

A sword, could be described as a weapon with long blade designed for cutting and/or thrusting, which has a hand grip of some fashion. However specificity in length of blade could create questions as to where a weapon crosses the line between a knife and a sword. Then there is the question of weapons such as the "messer" which was a large knife, but was the length of a short sword. It needs to be noted that the definition of the sword is not as easy as it might sound.

Sword is a Sword

All swords are swords, regardless whether it is a sabre or a rapier, katana or a schiavona, it is a sword. We are the individuals who divide them up and show them to be different in shape, or nationality, or use, or period, or whatever. In all cases all of the weapons which have been named, all six of them are swords. Obviously we divide them up so that it is easier to understand what we are talking about, but sometimes this creates confusion if a person does not understand what the other person is talking about. The most important point that needs to be made is that they are all swords. Regardless of which period of history, or from which culture, they are swords.

Similarities

"The difficulty of treating the Sword is enhanced by the peculiar individuality which characterises it, evidenced by an immense variety of physique, and resulting as much from unconscious selection as from deep design. One of the characteristics of indigenous art is that no two articles, especially no two weapons, are exactly alike; yet they vary only within narrow and measurable limits." (Burton, 1987:xxi)

Burton (1987) is describing how swords are both complex articles in which no two are exactly the same, but at the same time all fall within a certain level of variation. It is this second point which needs to be noted. There are similarities across swords which cannot be denied. They all have blades and hilts, obviously, but a person can get even deeper in the examination of the similarities. The cross-guard is also a similar item. In some cases it may be a part of the handle, but it is still present, if in a reduced form. In the case of the katana it is the tsuba, thus a circular cross-guard, which would seem somewhat contradictory. The pommel is also present, it is the part of the sword which holds the rest of it together, and in the western versions adds counter-weight. In the katana this is the kashira.

These similarities which have been pointed out, only are those in the hilts of the weapons, the blades also have similar characteristics as well. All have a strong, weak and a middle portion of the blade; these are all relative strengths in comparison to one another. The strong is most used for defending, the weak is most used for offending, and the middle is most used for controlling actions of the opponent's weapon. When it comes to the question of edges, the weapons do have at least two edges, even though one of them may be blunt. Even this blunt edge can be used for actions against the opponent, such as parrying and actions of control. These similarities in physical form need to be noted and appreciated.

Shape, Use or Culture?

Swords have been classified and organised into groups often by specific shape, function or culture. The question is what is the best method of classifying them, is it one or a combination of these methods. Burton (1987) suggests two which are common among collections being Topical and Geographical or Material and Formal, the former considers the culture, location, place and date, the latter which only considers the objects themselves (Burton, 1987:xxii). Obviously both have their advantages and disadvantages. Coe et. al. (1996) use a more combination system taking into account both the artefacts themselves along with the cultural situation in which they were found in, thus taking advantage of both approaches described by Burton (Coe et.al., 1996:6).

The combination of classification of weapons has the advantage of not only examining the objects themselves and examining them for construction, shape and manufacture, but can also look at the culture in which they were found and look at their use, which is often sorely missing in curatorial approaches to weapons. This missing approach leads these curatorial approaches to divide swords down definitive lines which are not actually there, due to misinterpretations as to how the weapons were used.

Some weapons were more specialised in a single area of use than others, this is undoubted. A perfect example of this is the estoque, or tuck, which was designed to be used by an armoured combatant against another for a thrusting attack designed to pierce through gaps in armour. The weapon had no edge, so there was no chance that there was any chance of cutting ability. Often this is claimed to be the origin of the rapier, however that it is a weapon designed for armoured combatants makes this a somewhat spurious claim.

The rapier is a classic weapon for the abuse of weapon historians about its use. For some it was a purely point-orientated weapon which could not cut at all. For others it could cut just as easily as more military-styled weapons which were its contemporaries. Neither of these is accurate. The rapier was a point-orientated weapon, meaning that it was designed more for the thrust than the cut, but it could still cut, just not as well as a military sword of the same period, it was designed for civilian duelling and self-defence.

On the other end of the scale some would attempt to have us believe that the longsword was purely designed for cutting and that it did not thrust at all. Longswords came in several different forms indeed Oakeshott numbers twenty-two different types of sword in the medieval period (Oakeshott, 1998:24), thirteen of which could be claimed to be longswords. Some of these were predominantly cutting weapons, but that is not to say they did not have a tip to thrust with, and some of them were more designed to thrust with also. So, needless to say, it depends on which form of the longsword is being spoken about.

The sabre is in a similar situation, it can also thrust as well. No doubt Oriental weapons have the same spurious claims been made about them. These arguments will not be discussed here as I do not have the expertise in this field. Needless to say, weapons need to be examined carefully before claims on their use are made, especially when it comes to specialisation.

Conclusion

Each person has their preferences. Some people prefer chocolate ice-cream over vanilla, some people just don't like ice-cream at all. Preferences for swords are much the same, just because you prefer the longsword, does not mean that you cannot appreciate the jian, katana, gladius or rapier. Each sword has something to say about it and of its use. There are many similarities between weapons which can be appreciated.

Each sword was a tool designed for its time and place, to take it out of this time and compare it to something else, to deride it is not useful. Placing a sword on a modern battlefield and trying to compare it to modern weapon systems is like trying to take an apple and compare it to an orange among other oranges. Sure, both of them are fruit, but they are simply not a good match for comparison unless the question is for preference about fruit, not the best orange.

The greatest challenge we face is to get out of our comfort zones, and in some cases these comfort zones are quite small. Have a look at some others swords and appreciate them for what they are and what they can do. Make comparisons of them with swords that you are familiar with, but not for the purposes of derision, but for the purposes of noting similarities and other positive notes. This way you will come to appreciate more weapons and also the skills that go along with these weapons. Remember that the two deciding principles of time and distance exist for all martial arts armed and unarmed, you can learn something from all different places if you really put your mind to it.

Bibliography

Burton, R. F. (1987) The Book of the Sword, Dover Publications Inc., New York, USA

Cambridge Dictionary (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/)

Coe, M. et. al. (1996) Swords and Hilt Weapons, Prion Books Limited, London

Oakeshott, E. (1998) The Sword in the Age of Chivalry, The Boydell Press, Woodbridge

Oxford Dictionary (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/)

Merriam-Webster Dictionary (https://www.merriam-webster.com/)

Re-Inventing the Wheel

Greetings,

There are questions which are going to be asked about this particular post, like what is he on about? That is simple. There is the propensity for the Historical European Martial Arts (HEMA) community for re-inventing the wheel rather than taking perfectly good examples of things and either just using them or modifying them slightly to suit their purposes. This post will give three examples which seem to keep coming up as issues for the community which have been dealt with elsewhere before.

Why?

Why is it that in HEMA people seem to need to keep re-inventing the wheel? It is almost like that what has come before is just not good enough, or because it comes from another sport, or similar area and they do not want to be like them that they cannot use anything which is anything like them. There are three topics which have histories which are established which could be used as they are, or modified to purpose, yet they are not. This is, of course, causing people issues and in some cases injuries as a result because people are doing the hard work that has been done before all over again.

Armour

Armour has been around for literally thousands of years, yet when it comes to HEMA rather than looking at existing examples of armour and simply copying it or modifying the armour to suit, new armour has to be invented. The great saga of the gauntlet is the greatest example of this one that can be put up as a prime example. There were fully-articulate gauntlets manufactured and used in the medieval and Renaissance period. Why are they not just copied? Or at least the principles of their designs not copied? Its not like they did not work.

What I find really amusing about this one is that people in HEMA have been cobbling together protective gear from other sports or designing it based on other sports, and then realising that it has holes in it, which are not covered. Then these holes are being covered by examples which are found on medieval and Renaissance armours. Knee protection first just covered the front of the knee for HEMA, now it seems that fans are being added to protect the sides and give some protection to the back of the knee, which are, of course, found on medieval and Renaissance knee cops. Why go through the effort of having to find out what does not work when we already know what does?

Armour Standards

When it comes to the question of protective gear, each club or organisation will have their own ideas about what will be required for their own people. Obviously it will be dependent on the weapon that is being used, i.e. more will be required for doing longsword than smallsword. What is a little silly is that for the most part these standards are created on the spot from what the individuals think is reasonable. There is in existence an armour standard, for rapier at least, which has been around since at least the late 1990s which is an international standard, that being used by the Society for Creative Anachronisms (SCA).

Why not start with this and then add on to it? Obviously it is effective, and all of the hard work has already been done. Seems that some would rather not want to be in anyway associated with the group than use a standard which is known and works, which is ridiculous. Instead these people would rather go through the trials and issues of finding out what works and what doesn't, which puts their members at risk.

Refereeing

There has been a lot of discussion about how tournaments should be judged, whether one referee should be used and four linesmen, or one senior referee and one junior and two linesmen, or some other combination. My particular preference is to teach the combatants to call their own blows, I mean they are the ones receiving them so they would know the best if they have been hit or not. Some of this has started to filter into competitions and gradually it is beginning to hold some sway.

Again what we see is the HEMA community trying to re-invent the wheel when there is a system already available for them to use. This system is found in non-electric sport fencing. There is a presiding judge and one for each fencer. The presiding watches both competitors the others only watch their one fencer for a hit and indicate when theirs has been hit. Again, it is a recognised method with a recognised standard. It also results in using only three people and not four or five people to staff it, which has advantages when the staff are primarily volunteers.

Conclusion

Three different areas have been examined where standards or examples are have already been established, and yet in all three cases the HEMA community is trying to invent their own. The question has to be at this point in time, why? Is it an ego thing? Not willing to accept that maybe it has been done before? Or not willing to borrow from another group and thus admit that they may have some good ideas? Both of these are ridiculous reasons not to use ideas or standards used by another group and modify them to suit what is required. In most instances in the HEMA community, there is probably already an answer out there to the question which has been posed, it is a matter of finding the answer, and accepting that it is the answer. For some, it is the last bit that is the most difficult.

Sword and Shield: Norse Tradition

Greetings,

A previous post discussed the subject with regard to treatises and the use of the sword and shield. In this discussion it mentioned the Norse sagas. The following is a discussion about the Norse sagas and the information which can be found within them which is potentially useful when reconstructing the use of the sword and shield in the Norse fashion. It should be noted that this indicates some directions which are presented by the evidence, but does not make any wholesale claims about how a sword and shield should or should not be used. These are preliminary findings from a documentary discussion.

Norse Tradition – From the Sagas

          The first thing that should be noted is that the Norse warriors should not be thought of as mere brutes who used mere strength to bash their way to their opponents, skill was evidently present, “Grettir struck down between him and the shield, cutting off both his hands at the wrist.” (Palmer, 1999:15). Such a blow performed shows skill with the sword and demonstrates that the art of war as practiced by the Norse needs a closer look before sweeping claims are made.

Shield Construction

Norse shields evidently had shoulder straps on them, enabling the shield to be swung on to the back enabling the sword to be gripped with two hands, “When he had said this, he gripped his hilt with both hands, and, fearless of peril, swung his shield upon his back and slew many.” (Clements, 1999)

The idea that the shields of this period were weak in some fashion, even though there is evidence of them being destroyed in the same saga, should not be over-stated, the shield was still used as the prime defence, “but, distrusting his sword, parried the blows of both with his shield,” (Clements, 1999). This clearly tells us that the shields were well-made and there are quite a few mentions of shield bosses made of metal.

Further to this idea Palmer (1999) mentions a shield which was evidently passed along, “with the round target that once had belonged to Thorveig.” (Palmer, 1999:4). This means that the shield had been through one user and then proceeded to be used by another; again this disputes the weak nature of shields of this period. There is also evidence from the same source that they were bordered with iron, “his sword stuck fast in the iron border of Steinar’s shield.” (Palmer, 1999:4), a factor which would have extended the life of the shield quite a lot and made it not a disposable item.

Shield struck and damaged

          While it is true there is evidence from both Clements and Palmer of shields being destroyed by blows and also cut through, it would seem that the blows which did this were extraordinary rather than the regular blows the shield would take. Further a shield which a sword would bite into could be used to the user’s advantage, “the blow fell on his shield. Gunnar gave the shield a twist as the sword pierced it, and broke it short off at the hilt.” (Palmer, 1999:17). Thus in this case while the shield was penetrated the occurrence was used to its owner’s advantage by breaking the opponent’s sword while it was stuck. Swords sticking into a shield are evident in more than one place in these sagas.

Use of shield

          There is also evidence of swords not sticking into the edge of a shield, “Kari caught the blow sideways on his shield, and the sword would not bite;” (Palmer, 1999:22), clearly the angle at which Kari parried his opponent’s blade was not correct to catch the opponent’s weapon in the edge of it. The use of the shield to defend a warrior is evident in many places throughout the sagas, “where he defended himself, holding his shield before him, and hewing with his sword. They made little way against him.” (Palmer, 1999:15). In some cases it was holding ground, and in other cases it was merely defending, “He held his shield before him and retreated” (Palmer, 1999:15). In either case, the shield was the key to the warrior’s defence.

          Of course there is also evidence of what would happen if the warrior could not use his shield in time to block a blow of an opponent, “so he could not throw his shield before the blow,” and so was struck (Palmer, 1999:19). In this case “throwing” the shield before the blow is extending it toward the opponent. This gives evidence that the shield of the Norse warrior was not used in a passive way, but in an active one.

          The shield was not held back, but extended toward the opponent, “Thorbjorn took his shield, and held it before him, drew his sword” (Palmer, 1999:15). This would enable the warrior to have room to move, or draw their sword and presents the shield in a more active position rather than a more passive one. In most instances where the shield is used it is in an active position rather than a more passive situation, “Then Thorbjorn rushed upon Grettir and struck at him, but he parried it with the buckler [shield] in his left hand and struck with his sword” (Palmer, 1999:16). This idea of the active use of the shield culminates in the shield strike where it is used against the opponent, “Thoralf thrust his shield so hard against Eyvind that he tottered with the shock.” (Palmer, 1999:24). This shield strike could be made against the shield or directly against the opponent, either way it demonstrates a very active method of using the shield rather than a passive one as often has been assumed.

Bibliography

Clements, J. (1999) “Selected Anecdotes and Accounts of Epic Combat from Saxo Grammaticus”, http://www.thearma.org/essays/Saxo.htm#.WW2B44SGPIU

Palmer, T. (1999) “Viking Fighting Notes from 23 Sagas”, http://www.thearma.org/essays/vikingfight.htm#.WW2BgISGPIU

Advertising: "Un-Blogged: A Fencer's Ramblings"

Greetings,

Well, after some writing, collating, and quite a bit of editing I have created a book version of several of the posts which have been made here. Some people asked me to do this as they found that the articles were quite useful and they would be even more useful in a book format. Well, you got your wish. The book was published on 15 March 2019, you may have seen the advertisements at the bottom of some of the posts for my GoFundMe to raise money to get the book published. These will give you an idea of some of the articles which appear in this book. If you have enjoyed reading my posts you will enjoy reading my book. It includes a Foreword by Keith Farrell.

"“A Fencer’s Ramblings” is a blog which was started in May 2010 to spread knowledge about the subject of Historical European Martial Arts, and indeed fencing in general. While there is a definite bend toward particular areas, nationalities, and forms, this blog has covered many differing subjects. What is contained within this book is a selection of the articles which appear on this blog, along with some extra articles of interest by the author. These have been updated and slightly re-written to suit their normal format, but they still retain their original purpose, to inform and educate the reader about various elements of the subject of fencing, which in and of itself must be taken from a broad point of view. Some of them are conversational others are written from a more academic point of view, this selection contains something of relevance for anyone who is interested in swords or swordplay."

This book is available from Book Depository, Fishpond, Amazon, Waterstones among other retailers. At my last check, they can get the book delivered to you cheaper than I can.

An electronic version (pdf) is available also: https://buy.stripe.com/fZecP419c7CB9VKeUV

Some Points of Fencing Etiquette

Greetings,

There is a certain flavour to swordplay, and an expected code of conduct which is seen. This is one of the things that differentiates it from just two combatants beating the snot out of one another with swords. Many of these elements of etiquette are common knowledge, but some, it would seem, are not so common and need to be brought into the light. I have previously written a rather long discussion about fencing etiquette if you're interested, it can be found here. Needless to say this is a big thing for me.

At the beginning of a bout the two combatants salute one another, this is a sign of respect and thanks for their presence. Any officiating staff or an official table can be saluted as well, this is also a sign of respect and thanks. Once the bout has concluded the two combatants should handshake at the end of the bout to thank each other for the bout, all this is usual stuff. None of these actions should display any attitude toward the opponent or how well the fencer did during the bout. More to the point, these actions should be done regardless if the officiating staff directs the fencers to do so or not. It is just being polite and keeps the bout civil. This is all expected sort of stuff, which most fencers who have been about for a while would know.

Before all of this happens, there are some important steps that need to happen. Firstly, if this is the first time that you are meeting this particular opponent. It is good fencing etiquette to go up and introduce yourself to them. This is a good way to get the measure of your opponent and also break some of the tension. Even when the tournament stakes a relatively high, they are not to the death, and when they were the two combatants knew one another by name. It also means that you will know who you are fencing next time that their name is called, and it is also more likely that you will be able to discuss the bout afterward in a friendly manner. Friendships can be made by such a simple introduction.

With regard to introductions there is another step that needs to be made. When you arrive you should go and introduce yourself to the tournament officials and thank them for running the event. This will instantly put you on their radar in a positive way. When another school is running the tournament, you should also go and find their head instructor and introduce yourself to them, this is simply being  polite.

If you are a head instructor of another school then this is even more important so that the other head instructor knows who you are. This way they know who to contact about disciplinary actions and also commendable actions performed by your students. If you merely just hang around with your students and other school members no one will know who you are, and if you then start giving instructions, offence may be given. This is an element of fencing etiquette which ensures smooth communication between participating schools at tournaments and builds a community spirit among them. It is vital to remember that fencing etiquette applies to all and that students will learn the keys of this from their teachers and thus they need to be examples for their students to follow.

There are designated safety officials at events, sometimes they are called Safety Marshals, sometimes just plain Marshals, either way, these individuals are the individuals who take the official burden of the safety of the event upon their shoulders, and it is not an easy task. What is even more important is that safety is everyone's concern, thus by default everyone is a safety official. If you see something which is of a safety concern, you are expected to call it. No one is going to complain if a bout is briefly halted due to someone being concerned about safety. Don't wait until it becomes a real issue stop it early. What is this doing in a discussion about etiquette? A person who does not assist where it is required in this area and leaves an incident to happen, which they could have stopped, breaches etiquette by their silence. There are times when staying silent is worse than standing up and saying something, and this is one of them.

Cheers,

Henry.