Incredible statement about cutting in Mc Bane

[Jeffrey Hull]

I apologise for a confusing post, but not for my stance. Yes, I have perused the McBane stuff, and yes I realise that he is speaking of off-hand holding/wrapped in cloak. My stupid oversight made me seem unaware. Here is what I should have written, amended in brackets []; I should have edited my writing before finalising my post:

*****

What if the broad-swordsman strikes the cloak-wrapped arm [or the small-sword arm] of the small-swordsman as hard as he can with the broad-sword, and then the small-swordsman can decide whether or not he can fight with his small-sword wielded by his quite-possibly broken arm? If it is still intact, then broad-swordsman may have already stricken small-swordsman in his shins, head, ribs, the same arm or whatever other targets, any whereof, again, if uncut, might be shattered in any case by a flurry of savage blows. Perhaps enough thereof would qualify at last as those that "kill". And gee, maybe not all broad-swordsmen like to move slowly, stand still and/or in line with the dashing effete small-swordsmen. I guess that I therefor disagree with McBane. JH

*****

I should like to throw in these quotes, and thanks to he who pointed them out to me:

"That there are persons of mistaken ideas in almost every Art or Science, is what few will deny. Yet I am inclined to believe there are more erroneous opinions entertained with regard to the Art of using the Sword than on most other subjects." Joseph Roland, The Amateur of Fencing, 1809.


"Though there are People of a bad Taste in every Art or Science, there are more in that of Fencing than in others, as well by Reason of little Understanding of some Teachers, as of the little Practice of some Learners, who not acting upon a good Foundation, or long enough, to have a good idea of
it, argue so weakly on this Exercise."
Monsieur L'Abbat, Treatise on the Small-sword, 1734

Stuart: The possibility exists that McBane was offering faulty advice. I myself did not witness any of the slayings he was said to have done - did you?

JH

[Guest]

Jeffrey, some of the feats of Mc Bane were accomplished in the gladiating prize fighting enviroment that is as you know a public one, so he performed in front of wittnesses. He was even decorated for bravery in action and if you read his life's account you see that he had no problem in describing himself like someone who lost his first two duels and was spared twice, than ran through his opponent the third time and left him for dead (he was not), therefore I think he was a sincere man and a capable swordman.

[Guest]

Hi, this reply is to Tim and Jake's posts.
Tim the civilian sword wearer not necessarlily possessed the strenght and the ability to deliver effective cuts with an heavy weapon, he might be a bit weak, old, or simply not willing to have an heavy weapon on his belt all day, for these reason I think he developed point fencing with weapons that were increasingly dedicated to it. That rapier duels ended with death for one or even both partecipants more often than C&T or broad sword duels is stated by many Silver among others. You're right: ambush comes from uman nature, the civilian swordman was not really knightly, Hutton called the Italian masters of the rapier "masters of revenge" not "of defence".
Jake I think the schiavona is a broad sword from the civilian point of vew, like the scottish basket hilted, the chivalry sabre, the falchion, etc... It may be classed as C&T in the military enviroment in which it was used, it was issued in the North East, we in the North West never used it. The sword of Di Grassi, Quintino, Agrippa etc.. is, I think, lighter, more agile and point oriented.

[Jake_Norwood]

Jake I think the schiavona is a broad sword from the civilian point of vew, like the scottish basket hilted, the chivalry sabre, the falchion, etc... It may be classed as C&T in the military enviroment in which it was used, it was issued in the North East, we in the North West never used it. The sword of Di Grassi, Quintino, Agrippa etc.. is, I think, lighter, more agile and point oriented.

I think in general what you are referring to as a "broad sword" is indeed a C&T. I can't speak about DiGrassi (hey Tony! get in here!) nor about Quintino, but Agrippa is using a rapier, not a cut-and-thrust. Having sparred with a steel schiavona I can assure you that it is very capable in the thrust. It's complex hand-guard (indicative of a weapon that used the thrust amply) supports my labelling the schiavona as a cut-and-thrust weapon. You are correct, I believe, in saying that it's a military weapon, however. Wasn't it used by the Slavic mercenaries in Italy?

I think we're suffering from a vocabulary issue here. What do you think a C&T is? A rapier? A broadsword? Here's my definitions:

C&T: a single-handed sword agile in both the cut and the thrust, including many "sword-rapiers," Schiavonas, most any side-sword (Spada da lato, as Morozzo calls it), or the "short sword" of George Silver. These often have a complex hilt, but not always.

Rapier: The long skinny sword meant for no real cutting but lots of powerful thrusting, as in Cappo Ferro.

Broadsword: (1) the Scottish basket-hilted-claymore (2) a vitorian term from swords broader than a rapier (3) a ren-faire term for anything that isn't a rapier.

None of these bear any reseblance to the falchion, which was a meat cleaver, as far as swords go.

I hope that clears up where I'm coming from.

Jake

[Tony_Indurante]

Di Grassi is using a cutting sword. Nothing percludes a cutting sword from being good with the thrust. Nor do I think that a cutting sword must be overly heavy. I think, especially in the case of Di Grassi, that most people just are not in as good of physical shape as these past Masters. Di Grassi talks about this in several places throughout his manual and devotes the 3rd part of the book to this.

[Guest]

The schiavona was used by the Schiavoni, a Venice militia including slavic soldiers, Venice is in the N. E., it would seem that in the rest of Italy there's not been another specific military model of sword for a long time. Mc Bane said the spadroon was common in Piemonte, that is the region west of mine, Lombardia. Seems like pole weapons were more indicative of a spacific region for instance: "spiedo friulano" is an infantry spear with two side arcs meant to break the legs of an horse, "spiedo bolognese" is an infantry spear that is commonly known as partesan. In Lombardia the halberd was very common. To me a C&T is either an edged sword with a ribbed blade meant for thrusting into armor gaps or, for a civilian, a "light for it's lenght" edged sword, the schiavona isn't light for it's lenght, I do not know how well you can use it to thrust in armor gaps, this you know better than me for sure. If it's good in the latter sense, I will put it in the C&T family, if not it'll be a broad.
A civilian C&amp;T should let you be, in my opinion, able to perform parries with the wrist against thrusts and thrust back or draw cut (fast and deeply) without moving the shoulder in the whole manouver. Interestingly some light infantry sabres fit this definition while they are still able to deliver a good cut, not really dismembering, but when a cut causes enough pain, why ask more? The spadroon fits the definition, I think Di Grassi's sword fits the definition because it could be used to cut from the wrist, someone not skilled at it would get no good result I suppose, with his opponent wondering why he looks like someone who wounded him <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
I guess that some swords that are C&amp;T's in their own right become broad swords in my personal classification.

[Jake_Norwood]

I guess that some swords that are C&amp;T's in their own right become broad swords in my personal classification.

That's true for all of us, to some degree. As for the weight of the schiavona--I've sparred with a replica (and not the best one), and I found it handled as well as any side-sword. It fits all of the criteria you mention in-use. C&amp;T is a modern name for a wide group of swords, so this kind of confusion is normal, I suppose.

Jake

[Jay Vail]

Whatever McBane says about the value of the cut, here is what small bladed weapon, the kukri, will do:

“‘The two stood off, Rai with his kukri and the Chinese with his knife. The Chinese started moving his hands in circles like a boxer, his front hand empty and open, his knife back near his chest. Rai leapt off and hit right on the front arm with that big curved blade. It [the arm] almost fell off near the elbow! But before blood could even spew, in an instant, Rai swung hard at the man’s head. The end of his kukri tore into the Chinese’s neck, and he fell into a human pile on the ground. I swear it was that fast. Two seconds. Two swings. Arm gone. Neck gone.’”

[Guest]

After a bit of pondering on the manual, I start to think Mc Bane was actually promoting light cutting and thrusting blades over heavy ones (I like him a lot for this), not promoting thrusts over cuts. Actually it would seem he liked the spadroon better than the small sword and the broad sword for military duty. He does promote cuts, but they are fast cuts to vital areas (throat, groin, wrist..., for this I like him even more <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> , it's so Italian), not any kind of cuts to any kind of target, this I think is the point.
Regards
Carlo

[JeffGentry]

HMMMM from what i have read it seem's to me that the small sword and cloak are going to be faster on the cut, thrust, and parry than a "broad sword" but if the sword weilder's are exualy matched in skill the man with the small sword can move aroud much quicker and avoid alot of the cutt's with out much parring with the sword, and the cloak could be used as a distraction, i hav ealso noticed it is very difficukt to feint with a large sword have not used a small sword and cloak but my research indicate's that feint's with a small sword arethe way to go.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Silver doesn't say much about the cloak that I can see. From my reading (others, please chime in if you know more), he says that thrusts and cuts are equally valid in their utility, but that cuts tend to be more immediately incapacitating.

[John_Clements]

Interesting quote, Jay. Where's that from???
I've got similiar accounts from 15th &amp; 16th century Europe.

JC

[Jaron Bernstein]

Hi Tim,

I got a question for ye. Somewhere out there in the WMA community, someone must have tried to spar (admittedly ahistorically) with a rapier against a longsword. I wonder how it turned out?

[TimSheetz]

HI Jaron,

I Never sparred Rapier vs ong Sword, but I used a Cut and Thrust vs Rapier. I called this first experience fighting with Senior ARMA people back in March of 2000 my "Rapier appreciation Training."

I knew it was an effective weapon but I got to see it used very well indeed! HOWEVER, I did NOT come to the conclusion that it was an ACE IN THE HOLE for the rapier user.

In the end, it is the USER that matters, not the weapon.

I was successful enough in this very unfamiliar fight to come away with an appreciation for the advantages and shortfalls of both weapon systems.

Tim