Silver question

[Stacy Clifford]

Silver seems to prefer the Middle aka High (It depends on who you're reading) Ward and then the Hanging Ward. As Such there is one on the left and one on the right. While there are other wards these best fit within the true times and Silver's personal preferences.

I don't know about Silver, but Swetnam doesn't distinguish between left and right versions of the low and high wards, he just says to be able to do each on both sides.

[Jon Pellett]

IMO by "wards" Silver means parrying/covering positions rather than general guards (look at how he uses the word in Brief Instructions).

My guess is that the four wards of the staff are High (hanging) and Low (hands low point up) on the inside and outside. There could be other guards as well that aren't wards as such.

[Martin Austwick]

IMO by "wards" Silver means parrying/covering positions rather than general guards (look at how he uses the word in Brief Instructions).

Wouldn't you say he uses it to mean both? "bear it with true guardant ward" & "bear this with forehand ward" as a couple of examples

My guess is that the four wards of the staff are High (hanging) and Low (hands low point up) on the inside and outside. There could be other guards as well that aren't wards as such.

So which side is forehand ward held on?

[Jon Pellett]

Wouldn't you say he uses it to mean both?

Yes, especially in Paradoxes, but not in this context. IMHO, anyway. Of course I could be wrong.

For instance you stand in true guardant fight, but you parry with true guardant ward. There is open fight, but not open ward. In Paradoxes Silver mentions the stoccata ward, but in BI he always calls the variable positions fights or lyings, and not wards. In the Spanish rapier fight there is one lying - the guard with your point forward - and two wards - turning the hand either way to parry blows to either side.

Silver doesn't tell us what the four wards of staff or sword are explicitly, but the four additional wards of the sword double and of the bill are all easy to identify, and they are all parries and not guards.

So it isn't 100% by any means, but I think the evidence supports the wards being more parrying positions, and guards being called fights or lyings.

So which side is forehand ward held on?

Both - what do you mean?

[Matt Bryant]

At first I thought Silver might be talking about Alber, Pflug, Hengen, and Ox (to use the German longsword equivalents). After thinking about it I changed to think he meant Alber, Hengen (two with the point down), Von Dach, and Pflug (two with the point up).

I am also with Stacy in that I think that Laying Aloft should be done with the staff going straight up right in front of your chest. After all, an 8 foot staff doesn't need to be pulled back very far in order to generate a lot of power. For more speed, it would be possible to let the staff lean forward a little bit even.

But all this is just my take. There is no hard evidence to show anything. Its just what makes to most sense to me.

[Martin Austwick]

Hi Jon,

Didn't mean to leave this as long as I have but I supidly moved house in the middle of a thread!

Wouldn't you say he uses it to mean both?

Yes, especially in Paradoxes, but not in this context. IMHO, anyway. Of course I could be wrong.

Well we all could, that's the fun bit...

For instance you stand in true guardant fight, but you parry with true guardant ward. There is open fight, but not open ward. In Paradoxes Silver mentions the stoccata ward, but in BI he always calls the variable positions fights or lyings, and not wards. In the Spanish rapier fight there is one lying - the guard with your point forward - and two wards - turning the hand either way to parry blows to either side.

I don't think this is quite as black and white as you are portraying. However I also don't think it is really that relevant as I will try to explain.

Silver doesn't tell us what the four wards of staff or sword are explicitly, but the four additional wards of the sword double and of the bill are all easy to identify, and they are all parries and not guards.

Indeed, but in short sword we have a position called True Guardant, and we use this position as a ward in order to defend ourselves. So what does it matter whether we call it a "ward" as in static position, or a "ward" as in active defense as the position is the same. We are allowed to sit in TG (within reaons I know) and we are able to use it to defend ourselves. If staff has four wards, then why can they not be lyings as well as active defenses?

So it isn't 100% by any means, but I think the evidence supports the wards being more parrying positions, and guards being called fights or lyings.

But if we can also sit in a parrying position then what difference does it make?

So which side is forehand ward held on?

Both - what do you mean?[/quote]

Just that we have a "ward" that has one name, but can be positioned on either side of the body, so why can the staff wards not be the same?

Hope this makes some sense...

[Jon Pellett]

We are allowed to sit in TG (within reaons I know) and we are able to use it to defend ourselves. If staff has four wards, then why can they not be lyings as well as active defenses?

I do think they can be lyings as well as active defences (the high and low guards of staff are both). I'm not suggesting that "wards" are strictly active defences, just that they are positions that cover you directly. So TG is a ward, but Open is not, nor is Stoccata. But of course you can use TG or forehand as a "fight" as well.

But if we can also sit in a parrying position then what difference does it make?

Not a lot. It just means that there can be more than four guards. I don't think the equivalents of Vom Tag or Alber belong to the "four wards", but it is fine to use them because guards don't have to be wards.

Just that we have a "ward" that has one name, but can be positioned on either side of the body, so why can the staff wards not be the same?

I don't see why they couldn't be. I think that forehand counts as a different ward on each side, because the additional four sword wards (for the legs and for the head) and wards with the head of the bill count each side separately. But as you say Silver could also have counted the same ward on both sides as the same thing. I don't think there is any way to say.

I really don't think it's terribly important exactly what the four wards are. Silver doesn't tell us, so all we can do is just use what he tells us to anyway.

Good luck with your new place BTW.

[Martin Austwick]

I do think they can be lyings as well as active defences (the high and low guards of staff are both). I'm not suggesting that "wards" are strictly active defences, just that they are positions that cover you directly. So TG is a ward, but Open is not, nor is Stoccata. But of course you can use TG or forehand as a "fight" as well.

Do you feel that Stoccata is something that Silver suggests we use? Personally I don't, I can't recal it ever being something that anyone other than the Italianate agent would use. We are told how to counter it, but never what to do if we are in it. So that leaves Open as the odd one out, as TG, BG and F are all positions that are also "wards" by your definition. Is that because Open is more specialised and is simply a position from which to countercut? If so could we argue that it is included because of its similarity to TG?

Not a lot. It just means that there can be more than four guards. I don't think the equivalents of Vom Tag or Alber belong to the "four wards", but it is fine to use them because guards don't have to be wards.

Certainly possible, but why would he not bother to tell us how to lie? I suspect (and it is only a suspicion, not a verifiable fact) that they are both positions and defenses.

I don't see why they couldn't be. I think that forehand counts as a different ward on each side, because the additional four sword wards (for the legs and for the head) and wards with the head of the bill count each side separately. But as you say Silver could also have counted the same ward on both sides as the same thing. I don't think there is any way to say.

But at least with the bill these wards are to do with the alignment of the head, so with a staff this wouldn't be the case. Though I admit that in this instance they seem to be actions, not positions.

I really don't think it's terribly important exactly what the four wards are. Silver doesn't tell us, so all we can do is just use what he tells us to anyway.

Fun debating though

Good luck with your new place BTW.

Thanks, it is lovely, very spacious. The dog doesn't know what to do with herself...

[Jon Pellett]

Do you feel that Stoccata is something that Silver suggests we use? Personally I don't, I can't recall it ever being something that anyone other than the Italianate agent would use.

It's hard to say what Silver intended. His whole treatment of variable fight is pretty lousy. But you're right, Silver never tells us to use Stoccata or any of the other Italianate lyings he describes (and doesn't bother to explain the forehand ward, which we are told to use ). That said, since he says to switch around between various blows, thrusts, and lyings, I think that they could serve as examples of transitional positions you might enter in the course of your variable fight. I have not made up my mind about this.

Certainly possible, but why would he not bother to tell us how to lie?

He doesn't actually tell us how to lie with the staff though - he just says to lie however you like so long as you can strike, thrust double and single, and ward. Even if the four wards are meant as the only guards he still doesn't say how to actually hold them. I think Silver was fairly flexible about what positions to use anyway.

[Stacy Clifford]

I think Silver was fairly flexible about what positions to use anyway.

I agree, compared to a lot of masters (including Swetnam) who take the attitude that "you're safer if you don't do this, even though a lot of people do," for instance on striking blows vs. thrusting, I get the feeling from Silver that he's more concerned with the results in the end. Kind of "you can do it as long as you're sure you can hit him and get away with it," at least in the staff section which I've studied. That may not hold for other parts I'm not as familiar with.

[Martin Austwick]

To me that is the joy of Silver. Unlike a lot of systems that provide you with a long list of techniques from which you can infer a system, he provides us with a set of rules that describe a system into which we can place all sorts of techniques. The few he describes simply give us a starting point.

I particularly like to steal techniques from other systems and drop them into Silver. As long as they conform to Space-Time (in the best traditions of Renaissance combat I am happy to steal terminology from modern science without really bothering to find out how it should be used) then they are fine...