 The
Myth of Edge-On-Edge Parrying in Medieval Swordplay
By John Clements
Some may consider the so-called
“edge versus flat parry debate” to be a non-issue
and merely beating a dead horse. I disagree. Considering
the frequency by which the question is still raised and
the countless examples of edge-on-edge blocking found within
stage combat, as well as the ubiquitous examples provided
everywhere from modern saber fencing to sport kendo and
even Star Wars light-sabers, the issue is more an undead
zombie horse perpetually rising from the grave.
Many historical fencing enthusiasts do not grasp the concepts of
parrying against cuts with cutting swords as described in numerous Medieval and
Renaissance fighting manuals. These texts
teach the concept of defending by counter-striking or by receiving blows on the flat
portion of the blade. As will become clear, edge-on-edge
parrying was not taught as doctrine. In fact,
defense, or warding of cutting blows, is described in many ways in 15th century
fencing texts by many masters and never as a direct resistant block of deliberate
opposition of sharp edge on sharp edge (so common in stage-combat and sport fencing and
derived from 18th and 19th century methods of swordplay).
There is a tremendous, if not outright complete, lack of any support
for doing so that can be found within any of the source literature (at least prior to the
17th century). While in contrast,
all the assorted fighting manuals on long-swords which we have make it quite clear how to
defend against cutting attacks by using intercepting and redirecting counter-blows, or
else by covering so that cuts land upon the flat (not edge) of the blade. As we will see, it isn’t any clearer than
that.
In much of my previous writings on this very subject I have tried to
offer an amalgam instruction using a distillation of teachings from various historical
sources. Parries in Medieval fencing are not those of either rapier fighting or later
forms of European swordplay. This
is probably why, despite hundreds upon hundreds of illustrated pages of longsword fencing,
the source manuals show nothing like the direct edge parries depicted and described so
clearly in much later fencing styles. However some enthusiasts remain
unconvinced, and this generalized approach is no longer justifiable. More specific citations and description on
parrying from the historical manuals is thus called for.
Without going into great detail here, I will try to offer a small portion of this
large volume of often ignored and misinterpreted evidence. [without footnotes or endnotes
in this online version]
I’ve described elsewhere before how defending against cuts was
done essentially:
- By voiding blows
through dodging
- By deflecting
blows by hitting them
- By stepping in to
stifle them, or by receiving them on the flat
 Parries can
be defined as the deflecting or deviating of the opponent's
blade before it reaches its target. With Medieval and Renaissance
cutting swords this was primarily achieved not by
receiving it so that it impacts your own weapon (especially
on its edge), but by hitting or beating at the oncoming
weapon to knock it off line and away. The difference is one of defense by counter-striking rather
than a rigid blocking or direct obstruction of their sharp
edge with yours. Doing
the latter not only leaves you vulnerable and less able
to attack, but damages your sword so that it will cut poorly
and it produces stress and fracture lines that will eventually
cause it to break.
Nowhere in the Medieval German fencing
manuals do we encounter words that mean parry or block as
it is defined in later fencing. Rather, we find the word
“displace”, Versetzen, as in intercepting
and deflecting attacks. While in the Medieval Italian
manuals we see similar terms (for example, coverta or
“covering”) meaning essentially, deflection, redirection,
and protection. </ | 