On the subject of survivability; there's a radical difference in the kind of trauma. A good thrust will cause somebody to bleed out in a matter of seconds, but the level of physical trauma is fairly low. Moat of your muscle and tissue is still intact. Even if you stab somebody through the arm, there is a decent chance they can still use it for a short while. Especially with ask that adrenalin coursing through their veins. Compare that to a cut. If you deliver a good cut to a limb, you sever a muscle. That limb is now useless. I was always told that Thrusts are more deadly, but cuts are more effective. This is ignoring all other factors, like actually landing the blows.
but that does ignore the fact that unvital cuts are less deadly and less effectual. a surface cut may look bad, but it overall does very little, while any thrust to the torso may result in a complete end to a battle if you defend again the reposte. so its not solly that cuts or thrusts are more effectual.
Another good informative video, thank-you! Yes, please bring up the volume. I turn up my sound approximately x2 for this and previous video. Keep up the great work!
Is it true that during the Napoleonic Era the French far preferred the thrust over the cut? I've been researching it myself for a while and I've found plenty of accounts of cavalry engagements but nothing that definitively states French preference for thrusting. There is, of course, the popukar example from the Peninsular War where a British dragoon was impaled upon a French officer's sword but still whacked his head in half before he died - pardon the colorful explanation.
+Jake Williams Von Starcher In my limited research, It would appear that that was true only for the heavy cavalry, I.E. the Curiassers and Carbiners. the heavy cavalry used type AN XI swords, that were strait, flat, and very long, eventually being clipped down a bit into "spear points". the light cavalry such as hussars still used curved sabers, to my knowledge. I could be off base here.
I recall reading a historical account where a cavalryman is stabbed through with a bayonet, and in his dying moments cleaved through the infantryman's skull.
One of the biggest problems with the thrust is when you have people with a very aggressive defence. In that they will cut in to your attack, time you, or what some systems call suppressing cuts. You have to judge it based on how an individual responds to your actions. Thrusting using the back of the blade, like carte over the arm, is especially risky in this regard. Sometimes the best thrusts are launched as cuts, as they force the opponent in to a defensive, rather than aggressive defence or timed hit. Much of landing a thrust in a fight with a lot of cutting comes down to good use of timing. Particularly with such an agile cutting sword as the sabre, there are so many times it can get you hit, either cleanly or double. I generally don't like the thrust in carte with sabre (even though I love it with rapier). It puts you in too weak a position if it fails. But initiating carte and turning it to prime is excellent if they maintain pressure. Otherwise I'd stay on the outside and work tierce, it is the safest and best all round thrust for sabre. I have come to like seconde for sneaky thrusts to the thigh against those who don't slip, but thrust under a sword has obvious risks.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Thanks for all the tips, I mainly attempt to thrust on their outside and lock their blade at the same time, like when I notice that they hold the sword to close to them, I try to quickly lunge in and take advantage, but the people I fence against are all very experienced so it rarely works.
@@londiniumarmoury7037 Yeh its not easy. When they hold too close and especially too low it can be a good opportunity. Always a risk they will disengage and thrust under though. They shouldn't do if they have any care for their life, but it happens. The main problem with landing thrusts like that is the moment people feel pressure, they tend to apply pressure back. Which is why it is so often better to then cut around. Ultimately if someone is very experienced at dealing with thrusts like that, its going to be tough. Coming from rapier to sabre gave me a great advantage in that regard. It's easy to see why smallsword/foil was recommended for sabre/broadsword fencers.
could part of this be the sort of system you use/ type of saber you are simulating? as from my knowledge thrusting became increasingly popular further into the victorian age and blades becoming more adapted to that ends as well.
Could you make a video (or write a comment) on sabres that one might use in sparring? I was looking for a metal blade that can be used for HEMA but also in historical reenactment.
It's not an easy one to answer as we have been experimenting to find new suppliers ourselves recently. For bowl hilt sabres we have long bought from Peter Regenyei, although he no longer makes the sort that we use. I will post a video about training sabres soon. Overall its difficult to find one that works for both HEMA and re-enactment. For HEMA we want thin edges, flexible blades, and rolled or flared tips, with grips large enough for heavy gloves. But re-enactment want untipped, thick edges and normal size grips. My advice would be to not try and mix the two, it will be too much of a compromise. Also, to recommend a sabre, I'd need to know what type you want. What period, what style. Big difference between say a 17th century Polish sabre, to a late 18th British, and a mid 19th century British.
Thanks for the answer! True, it's a difficult topic. And, true, hema and reenactment have different needs. But what about a show/duel within reenactment or theatre performances? With medieval swords I managed to find a middle ground between safe, battle ready weapons, and their historical look. I wonder if I can do the same with western european 18th century sabres.
If your re-enactment society has the typical safety requirements of 3mm edges and 2 pence piece wide tip, then no. You will have a heavy and unwieldy sabre. Our sabres taper down to 1mm edges towards the tip. If you don't do this, you will end up with what feels like a heavy cavalry sword. With a broad fuller that ran near enough to the tip it might be possible, but I would be surprised. Even with out swords, the necessity for blunt edges and rolled tips almost always makes them a bit heavier than desired. Also the lack of pommels makes it hard to counter balance to try and fix the issue. The sword in this video shows what can be done as it is a blunted cavalry sword, shortened as well to match infantry length. Even then it is still a little over 1kg, very heavy for an infantry sabre, and the edges are still too thin for re-enactment. If I were you I would go to one of the good Polish sword smiths, who commonly make sabres for re-enactment. One of the best is linked below. I have a HEMA sabre being made to my spec by him now - www.miecz-sword.com/about.html
Nick, I know this video does not talk about the topic I'm going to ask you, but is the more effective way to ask.Have you seen videos of UWM? If so, do you think this armour would help armed combat to be more realistic or is it going to do the opposite? (I think you touched this point tangentially in your last video) And while we are at it, do you think there could be a tournament or a space where HEMA can meet other martial arts for armed combat? What is the opinion about this of people in the HEMA community?Thanks, for your reply
+mechupanlamonda Hi there. Yes I have seen the UWM suits and training. No I do not believe it will help armed combat become more realistic. The idea is fascinating, but the reality is so far from anything we are trying to do in HEMA. The suits are too bulky to represent anything like unarmoured combat, which is what most of us are training for most of the time, and are not at all helpful for representing armoured combat. About HEMA meeting other martial arts for tournament. Well yes I believe it very much can happen. In fact most if not all HEMA tournaments currently do not require a specialism in a European martial art, only attendance and the required safety equipment to participate. Using foreign weapons is a small leap from there. However I am a believer that tournaments are only a small part of HEMA, and not the ultimate aim. Tournaments are a valuable tool, but not the ultimate aim. Near enough every time a martial art goes down the tournament route it becomes sportive and changes continually. For me, I would just like to see more sparring and practice between arts, as well as challenges and exhibitions between different arts. At the moment though the biggest barrier to that is that there are not many martial arts that practice weapon based arts to high contact levels.
And I think people exaggerate thrusts, you don`t have to impale the opponent, Matt from Schola gladiatoria said you need no more then 6 inches even less to kill, so thrust can be very nimble and faster and they will still do the job. Is that right?
+kiba BG It is certainly right that they can inflict severe injury and death with just a few inches of penetration yes, but I was working on that basis when I shot this video.
On the subject of survivability; there's a radical difference in the kind of trauma. A good thrust will cause somebody to bleed out in a matter of seconds, but the level of physical trauma is fairly low. Moat of your muscle and tissue is still intact. Even if you stab somebody through the arm, there is a decent chance they can still use it for a short while. Especially with ask that adrenalin coursing through their veins.
Compare that to a cut. If you deliver a good cut to a limb, you sever a muscle. That limb is now useless.
I was always told that Thrusts are more deadly, but cuts are more effective.
This is ignoring all other factors, like actually landing the blows.
Well said, Lord Salt.
but that does ignore the fact that unvital cuts are less deadly and less effectual. a surface cut may look bad, but it overall does very little, while any thrust to the torso may result in a complete end to a battle if you defend again the reposte. so its not solly that cuts or thrusts are more effectual.
Another good informative video, thank-you! Yes, please bring up the volume. I turn up my sound approximately x2 for this and previous video. Keep up the great work!
Is it true that during the Napoleonic Era the French far preferred the thrust over the cut? I've been researching it myself for a while and I've found plenty of accounts of cavalry engagements but nothing that definitively states French preference for thrusting. There is, of course, the popukar example from the Peninsular War where a British dragoon was impaled upon a French officer's sword but still whacked his head in half before he died - pardon the colorful explanation.
+Jake Williams Von Starcher
In my limited research, It would appear that that was true only for the heavy cavalry, I.E. the Curiassers and Carbiners. the heavy cavalry used type AN XI swords, that were strait, flat, and very long, eventually being clipped down a bit into "spear points".
the light cavalry such as hussars still used curved sabers, to my knowledge.
I could be off base here.
@@joedirt861 are you sure? pretty sure the french were known for the thrust on foot as well.
I recall reading a historical account where a cavalryman is stabbed through with a bayonet, and in his dying moments cleaved through the infantryman's skull.
I'm trying to use a more thrust centric fighting style when I spar at Scholagladiatoria and honestly I'm getting my wrists cut quite a lot lol.
One of the biggest problems with the thrust is when you have people with a very aggressive defence. In that they will cut in to your attack, time you, or what some systems call suppressing cuts. You have to judge it based on how an individual responds to your actions. Thrusting using the back of the blade, like carte over the arm, is especially risky in this regard. Sometimes the best thrusts are launched as cuts, as they force the opponent in to a defensive, rather than aggressive defence or timed hit. Much of landing a thrust in a fight with a lot of cutting comes down to good use of timing. Particularly with such an agile cutting sword as the sabre, there are so many times it can get you hit, either cleanly or double. I generally don't like the thrust in carte with sabre (even though I love it with rapier). It puts you in too weak a position if it fails. But initiating carte and turning it to prime is excellent if they maintain pressure. Otherwise I'd stay on the outside and work tierce, it is the safest and best all round thrust for sabre. I have come to like seconde for sneaky thrusts to the thigh against those who don't slip, but thrust under a sword has obvious risks.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Thanks for all the tips, I mainly attempt to thrust on their outside and lock their blade at the same time, like when I notice that they hold the sword to close to them, I try to quickly lunge in and take advantage, but the people I fence against are all very experienced so it rarely works.
@@londiniumarmoury7037 Yeh its not easy. When they hold too close and especially too low it can be a good opportunity. Always a risk they will disengage and thrust under though. They shouldn't do if they have any care for their life, but it happens. The main problem with landing thrusts like that is the moment people feel pressure, they tend to apply pressure back. Which is why it is so often better to then cut around. Ultimately if someone is very experienced at dealing with thrusts like that, its going to be tough. Coming from rapier to sabre gave me a great advantage in that regard. It's easy to see why smallsword/foil was recommended for sabre/broadsword fencers.
could part of this be the sort of system you use/ type of saber you are simulating? as from my knowledge thrusting became increasingly popular further into the victorian age and blades becoming more adapted to that ends as well.
Could you make a video (or write a comment) on sabres that one might use in sparring? I was looking for a metal blade that can be used for HEMA but also in historical reenactment.
It's not an easy one to answer as we have been experimenting to find new suppliers ourselves recently. For bowl hilt sabres we have long bought from Peter Regenyei, although he no longer makes the sort that we use.
I will post a video about training sabres soon. Overall its difficult to find one that works for both HEMA and re-enactment. For HEMA we want thin edges, flexible blades, and rolled or flared tips, with grips large enough for heavy gloves. But re-enactment want untipped, thick edges and normal size grips. My advice would be to not try and mix the two, it will be too much of a compromise.
Also, to recommend a sabre, I'd need to know what type you want. What period, what style. Big difference between say a 17th century Polish sabre, to a late 18th British, and a mid 19th century British.
Thanks for the answer! True, it's a difficult topic. And, true, hema and reenactment have different needs. But what about a show/duel within reenactment or theatre performances? With medieval swords I managed to find a middle ground between safe, battle ready weapons, and their historical look. I wonder if I can do the same with western european 18th century sabres.
If your re-enactment society has the typical safety requirements of 3mm edges and 2 pence piece wide tip, then no. You will have a heavy and unwieldy sabre. Our sabres taper down to 1mm edges towards the tip. If you don't do this, you will end up with what feels like a heavy cavalry sword.
With a broad fuller that ran near enough to the tip it might be possible, but I would be surprised. Even with out swords, the necessity for blunt edges and rolled tips almost always makes them a bit heavier than desired.
Also the lack of pommels makes it hard to counter balance to try and fix the issue.
The sword in this video shows what can be done as it is a blunted cavalry sword, shortened as well to match infantry length. Even then it is still a little over 1kg, very heavy for an infantry sabre, and the edges are still too thin for re-enactment.
If I were you I would go to one of the good Polish sword smiths, who commonly make sabres for re-enactment. One of the best is linked below. I have a HEMA sabre being made to my spec by him now -
www.miecz-sword.com/about.html
mieczsword.republika.pl/contact.html
Nick, I know this video does not talk about the topic I'm going to ask you, but is the more effective way to ask.Have you seen videos of UWM? If so, do you think this armour would help armed combat to be more realistic or is it going to do the opposite? (I think you touched this point tangentially in your last video) And while we are at it, do you think there could be a tournament or a space where HEMA can meet other martial arts for armed combat? What is the opinion about this of people in the HEMA community?Thanks, for your reply
+mechupanlamonda Hi there. Yes I have seen the UWM suits and training. No I do not believe it will help armed combat become more realistic. The idea is fascinating, but the reality is so far from anything we are trying to do in HEMA. The suits are too bulky to represent anything like unarmoured combat, which is what most of us are training for most of the time, and are not at all helpful for representing armoured combat.
About HEMA meeting other martial arts for tournament. Well yes I believe it very much can happen. In fact most if not all HEMA tournaments currently do not require a specialism in a European martial art, only attendance and the required safety equipment to participate. Using foreign weapons is a small leap from there. However I am a believer that tournaments are only a small part of HEMA, and not the ultimate aim. Tournaments are a valuable tool, but not the ultimate aim. Near enough every time a martial art goes down the tournament route it becomes sportive and changes continually.
For me, I would just like to see more sparring and practice between arts, as well as challenges and exhibitions between different arts. At the moment though the biggest barrier to that is that there are not many martial arts that practice weapon based arts to high contact levels.
great infos thanks !
Wise reasoning!!
What if you have parrying dagger to block the opponents after blow? Are thrusts good then?
+kiba BG Trusts are still useful with single sword. But yes if you have an offhand weapon they become safer.
And I think people exaggerate thrusts, you don`t have to impale the opponent, Matt from Schola gladiatoria said you need no more then 6 inches even less to kill, so thrust can be very nimble and faster and they will still do the job. Is that right?
+kiba BG It is certainly right that they can inflict severe injury and death with just a few inches of penetration yes, but I was working on that basis when I shot this video.
The volume is too soft and you talk too fast. (Other than that, I enjoy your instruction.)