Parry with the Flat

[SzabolcsWaldmann]

Hello allz,

Okay, so we learn and teach that the parry is with the flat. It makes sense of course, and all the fechtbuchs say it's the right way - or that is, what we are told.
For yesterday one of our trainings had a guest from an RPG/SCA/Acting group, who wants to join us, and the only critic he could say after watching the training, that we do not parry with the edge.
Most people would of course go wild how well we are informed, and what wondrous martial art this is, but not him. Since he learned that awful doctrine for years, he could not easilly be convinced - even dough I told him the facts about swords we know from Mr. Oakeshott, Mr. Reinhardt and Mr Clements of course. In the end, it all comes down to one answer:
We parry with the edge, becouse the fechtbuchs say so, and they must know the truth, for they are over 500 years old.
This was okay for him, the anly thing he could say was, that swords intend to break when hit at the flat - to which our answer was for him to change his bladesmith.
It all went well, and we can welcome him next week.

But you know what? It made me think. NOT if we should parry with the edge, by heavens, no! But where exactly do the fechtbuchs say the flatparry?
You see, we translate codexes a lot, and up to date, i have not found a direct evidence I could tell somebody who questions the Old Way. Some technics do simply not work with the edge and MUST be done with the flat no matter what, so there will be no explanations against the contradictionary... And there are a few sentences, which actually COULD mean a flat-parry like the "Alten Anfaenglichen Kunst...": "Mark the Flat of the Blade".

But what about Oberhau against Oberhau in Ringeck? We, in our Order teach it with abschneiden, so the second blade hits the first one from above at the flat with the edge, but it is not easy to do and it is not even written clearly in the codex. The whole mutieren and duplieren business works with edge on the edge. With a waster, it is not such a big concern, but does damage steel blunts a lot. And we have good quality swords, you can believe me that.

My whole big writing goes down to two questions.

1. Does anybody know an exact phrase from a Fechtbuch, which says, that one should parry with the flat? (you do not need to convince me. I simply need a codex, a page and a sentence)

2. Could it be, that the later fechtbuchs actually show and teach a little edge-on edge, but simply only because they are written for Fechtfeders?

Thank you a lot. I would need the answers for the next time I meet somebody like that guy from yesterday.

Byez

Szabolcs

[Brian Hunt]

Ok,

the big "no no" is parring edge to edge. You can strike his strike away with your edge on his flat, and lots of strokes are done this way, such as when you strike into his zornhau with a zornhau or a zwerchau. So you don't only parry with the flat. By the way, I have come to dislike the word parry. It comes with too much baggage from sport fencing, ie parry - repost. I prefer set aside, displace or displacements. Or better yet versetzen. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

hope this helps.

Brian Hunt
GFS

[Mike Cartier]

I agree with Brian, there are many ways to parry, each to its own purpose. Meyer by the way is a good example of a manual that clearly teaches flat parrying. Even his pflug is presented flat.

Also if you parry edge to edge you not only mess up your blades but you allow the opponent to more easily bind your sword making it more difficult to twitch or do some other handwork.

[philippewillaume]

Hello
Well as far as can tell it is not written anywhere directly, but I am only familiar with the German school 13-1400.

This is my understanding of uncle Sigmund
In Ringeck, we do not parry full stop. You counter-cut or you counter-thrust. (masterhaw used as abzetsen and absetzen proper)
We are even told that parrying is bad and evil

So our blade is aligned with our opponent, which makes edge parry not very likely.
And in the Krum passage, We are told how we can set aside with the krump. We need to krump at the flat of the master.

I hope that helped.

[Mike Chidester]

It's important also to note the difference between "parrying" (absetzen, setting aside) and counter striking (versetzen, off-setting). Parrying is warding, where you meet the opponent's weapon with a guard (like pflug or ochs), not a cut. In that case, you use your flat so that the blades meet edge to flat. (And preferrably you do so in a way that allows you an immediate counter-thrust as part of the warding action.)

In versetzen, you are actually counter-cutting, and so you would use your edge to cut with--but the angle of the cuts makes your blade strike the opponent's flat. Again, the blades meet edge to flat.

In all cases, the key is for the weapons to meet edge to flat. So what you must do is more rigorously define what you mean by "parrying", and then you'll know when it is advicable to use the edge and when it is not. I agree with Brian: "parry" is just a bad term altogether.

[Bill Welch]

Szabolcs wrote
"2. Could it be, that the later fechtbuchs actually show and teach a little edge-on edge, but simply only because they are written for Fechtfeders?"

My thought is later fight books showed edge to edge because it was depicting a different type of weapon (i.e. backsword, saber, etc) not traditional long sword.

Why must we prove that it did not show edge to edge. From the articles written by John, Mr. Oakshotte, various Blade smiths, imperical evidence from existing blades, and just plain common sense should tell you that edge to edge is both damaging to blades, and potentially dangerous to the user.

All the evidence for edge parries, that I have heard, or seen, or had inflicted on me all go back to the same tiresome argument that Silver(or Fightmaster from about the same time.) in some secret hidden text written about backsword, rappier, saber, cutless, or something, alluded to the possibility, that maybe, you might on some Occasion if you had to, use the forte, or back edge to parry a blow.

You might want to point out to the SCA guy that the reason his swords want to break when hit on the flat, could be cause from nicks on the edge of the blade creating weakness and stress fractures that cause the blade to fail, like etching a line in glass and breaking it.

So to me when people have the wrong impression about edge to edge, all you can do is give them the facts, and when they exept them for the intelligent reasoning they are, then you have done a great job, but when they come back with well in Silver, or Degrassie it says, then just smile and know that all you can do is try. <img src="/forum/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" />

[Bnonn Tennant]

I think it's important to remember that when you make a versetzen, you aren't going end up in a position where your edge is aligned perfectly to your man's flat. The point is not to establish some kind of perfect blade contact; it is to displace his weapon, while ensuring as much safety to yourself and to your sword as possible.
<p>
It is quite possible to make a zornhau in which your edge and his edge meet at more or less right angles, but to do so would violate these principles. This isn't to say that you should conduct a zornhau in such a way that you have to uncomfortably work against the natural mechanics of the strike in order to land your strike perfectly against his flat, however.
<p>
To be honest, people who make any kind of edge contact an absolute taboo are not taking a practical or useful approach to the art. Edge contact is inevitable, even in more or less ideal circumstances. There should be a guiding principle when interpreting and executing techniques that edge contact be avoided or minimized, but this needs to be balanced with the other principles that are needed: biomechanics, offense and defense, etc. If you're making a zornhau, your edge will impact with his at <em>some</em> angle (hopefully a small one), because you aren't going to get your edge perfectly against his flat. What's important is not to fret about a slight edge contact, but to ensure that this contact is not going to damage your blade or compromise the technique.

[Brian Hunt]

Agreed that there will be some minimal edge contact with a zornhau against a zornhau, but your blade should be descending from above over into his blade towards his flat and the angle will/should be small and roll on into the flat of his blade, it is not the destructive 90 degree edge to edge bashing pushed by hollywood and others that results in gouges out of the blade and terrible stress risers that cause your sword to be prone to breakage and failure.

Brian Hunt
GFS

[GaryGrzybek]

I like your view on this and agree for the most part. A combination of proper technique plus understanding the basic principles should help us avoid direct edge trauma. It also helps avoid the ongoing discussions that often turn into heated arguments. This is one of those subjects that can be refered to as "flogging a dead horse" <img src="/forum/images/icons/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Just recently someone borrowed my blunt side sword for some sparring and gave it back to me with several very deep gouges in the edge. This is something that hardly ever happens when I use my swords. I suppose I'll have to get together with him and go over some things. Besides, I should consider handing him a file and my sword <img src="/forum/images/icons/mad.gif" alt="" />

[Jon Pellett]

Hi there

Are you looking for a passage that says "Always parry with the flat/don't parry with the edge" as a general rule? Or are you just looking for examples of flat parries, to prove it was done?

I don't know that the former exists, but the latter is easy. There's loads in Meyer, for instance, e.g. in the Hendtrucken section "...so underfahr jhm seine streich mit der Kron, oder sonst hoher versatzung, oder undergehe jhn mit verhengen, und fang jhm sein Schwerdt auff deiner klingen fleche... - then move under his blow with the crown, or such like high defence, or go under with the hanging, and catch his sword on the flat of your blade.

My thought is later fight books showed edge to edge because it was depicting a different type of weapon (i.e. backsword, saber, etc) not traditional long sword.

Yeah, I think this has a lot to do with it. For instance, in Silver's short sword stuff, I think there is a fair bit of edge-to-edge (though admittedly Silver is very open to interpretation), but OTOH if you look at his two-handed sword (based on quarterstaff) the parry he describes is a lot like a krump, and would normally hit obliquely or on the flat.

All the evidence for edge parries, that I have heard, or seen, or had inflicted on me all go back to the same tiresome argument that Silver(or Fightmaster from about the same time.) in some secret hidden text written about backsword, rappier, saber, cutlass, or something, alluded to the possibility, that maybe, you might on some Occasion if you had to, use the forte, or back edge to parry a blow.

Heh, I'm a sucker for a fight. Okay, Silver says explicitly to use the forte for guardant and the parries double for the head, and the true and false edges for the leg parries. This is for short sword/backsword. He never actually says to use the flat (although I do use the flat for one of them).

You are probably thinking of Viggiani; that's where the clincher is. <img src="/forum/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Whoops, my attorney just called; something about an injunction from the SPCA for desecrating the corpse of an equine... <img src="/forum/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Cheers

[Randall Pleasant]

Gary Grzybek wrote:
A combination of proper technique plus understanding the basic principles should help us avoid direct edge trauma.

Amen! I always point out to people checkng out our study group that in practice hard edge-on-edge parrying is not so must something not done as it is something that just does not happen with proper technique.

[SzabolcsWaldmann]

Hello everybody,

Thanks soo much for your effort.
But Jon, that was something, thanks. Finally something. You see, I translate Meyer to hungarian but have not yet reached that part <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

Okay.... So you are telling me, that a fullpower zornhau against a fullpower zornhau is OK?
I do not want to argue here, this is just the thing that makes me the most headaches. It is not a direct catch with your egde against his edge, but still. A Sword with the hardness of 56rcw or around that will bit chunks of metal out of the other sword, thats for sure. even more, because if I understand it correctly, you do Oberhau VS Oberhau with the middle of your sword, or the Strong part, but not with the ricasso.
I guess I have to go back again and again to this excresise.

All in all, flat parries are in Fechtbuchs evident, but not clearly written, hmmm..... that leaves place for some talkin' with 'unbelievers'. <img src="/forum/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" />

Thanxx a lot <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

Szabolcs

[JeffGentry]

Hye Szablocs

Okay.... So you are telling me, that a fullpower zornhau against a fullpower zornhau is OK?

Yes and at the same time a resounding No, the Zornhau to Zornhau counter is not to the sword, He throw's a zornhau at your left head/shoulder, You counter by stepping offline and throw your Zornhau at his left ear/shoulder, your changing the distance and angle by stepping offline will enable you to hit him and counter his zornhau all at the same time, it is hard to demonstrate at full speed with a waster/padded because waster's/padded's don't cut, that is why the fechtbuch's repeatedly tell us alway's strike to the man not the sword.

you do Oberhau VS Oberhau with the middle of your sword, or the Strong part, but not with the ricasso

Again when you step right or left offline it will be more flat against flat and displace there blade, very little if any edge contact will be made.

Like was stated earlier when we use good footwork and cutting technique it will normaly not result in a whole lot of edge to edge contact.

Jeff

[M Wallgren]

I agree with Jeff, the trick is the footwork in this technique!

and in most of the "little unclear" ones on this subject.

Martin

[Brian Hunt]

Yeah,

when done correctly, and with the proper footwork so well described here, it is a bit like trying to strongly shave hair off of his flat with your true edge, thereby displacing or redirecting his strike, and striking him at the same time. This can be a dangerous technique to practice, I reccomend head and face protection.

Brian Hunt
GFS