NEW Wallerstein/Vadi article online

[richmooney]

http://www.angelfire.com/ab7/lousywebsite/

and here:

http://www.angelfire.com/ab7/lousywebsite/vadi.html

enjoy!

Rich Mooney

[John_Clements]

Fascinating and intruiging. Excellent discovery, Rich. I look forward to what analysis may develop <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

JC

[Jaron Bernstein]

I gotta agree but would raise a question for your feedback also. I also get a sense that the human body is the human body, anywhere on earth. There are only so many ways to move, twist, throw and hit it. It is only logical that there is some "universality" in very similar techniques arising in very different places and times. I have also seen many similarities between the illustrated joint locks in Vadi (I haven't studied Wallerstein in any detail yet) and Chinese Chin-Na from my previous experience.

That said, I wonder if we can also get past the universality of some techniques in all places and figure out why different arts have evolved differently also. For instance as one example, the lack (as far as I know at least) of a sword and shield style of fighting in Japan vs. a very sophisticated sword and buckler system in WMA. While at the same time, the Vadi joint locks ARE found in some Japanese systems.

Why does the "universality" emerge in some areas but not others?

Any thoughts?

Jaron Bernstein
ARMA-Columbus

[Jay Vail]

For instance as one example, the lack (as far as I know at least) of a sword and shield style of fighting in Japan vs. a very sophisticated sword and buckler system in WMA.

Before the warring states period in Japan, Japanese weaponry closely resembled that of the Chinese. Thus, the Japanese employed the shield. However, for some reason they abandoned the shield in favor of the two-handed sword. I don't know enough about Japanese history to say why.

There is a sword and buckler tradition in Japan, but it seems to have been confined to the lower, non-samurai class, and it was more like a buckler and knife or buckler and wakizashi combination rather than buckler and sword. Have seen it demonstrated.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Hi Jay,

That then also speaks to the universality of many techniques, IMO at least.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Hi Jay <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

You wrote: "Before the warring states period in Japan, Japanese weaponry closely resembled that of the Chinese. Thus, the Japanese employed the shield. However, for some reason they abandoned the shield in favor of the two-handed sword. I don't know enough about Japanese history to say why.

There is a sword and buckler tradition in Japan, but it seems to have been confined to the lower, non-samurai class, and it was more like a buckler and knife or buckler and wakizashi combination rather than buckler and sword. Have seen it demonstrated."

I had no idea. But that also raises the question of commonality. To what degree are all arts in all places similar due to the universal human body and there being only so many ways to twist it or hit it with sharp metal objects? To what degree do culture, climate and history create DIFFERNCES between the arts over spatial and temporal gaps? Why for instance do we see an indentical joint lock in WMA, Japanes and Chinese (and likely other) arts, whereas the rapier was unique (AFAIK at least, I may be wrong on that also <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> ) to Europe. What is the relationship between what I call the universality of all techniques and some techniques that are culturally and temporally unique? Are there any techniques that are unique to one system that aren't seen elsewhere?

[Jay Vail]

To what degree are all arts in all places similar due to the universal human body and there being only so many ways to twist it or hit it with sharp metal objects? To what degree do culture, climate and history create DIFFERNCES between the arts over spatial and temporal gaps? Why for instance do we see an indentical joint lock in WMA, Japanes and Chinese (and likely other) arts, whereas the rapier was unique (AFAIK at least, I may be wrong on that also ) to Europe.

These are excellent questions. It appears that when men deal with the same class of weapons (those that are alike and have similar handling characteristics and demands) the solutions they find, although separated by culture and thousands of miles, are roughly similar if not in many cases identical. Such similarities would be dictated by the demands of the weapon (ie technology driven) and the limits of human physiology.

Nonetheless, we would be blind and closed minded not to acknowledge that there are differences in systems, even when the technology is the same. These differences can be subtle, or they can be extensive. As we explore western systems and compare them with their brothers in battle from the east, we will see them.

As for the rapier in the west, that has to be attributed to a technological development that had no parallel in the east, so no corresponding combat system was ever developed in the east.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Hi Jay,

You wrote: "These are excellent questions. It appears that when men deal with the same class of weapons (those that are alike and have similar handling characteristics and demands) the solutions they find, although separated by culture and thousands of miles, are roughly similar if not in many cases identical. Such similarities would be dictated by the demands of the weapon (ie technology driven) and the limits of human physiology."

Thus explaining the same armlock in 10 different places.

Jay wrote: "Nonetheless, we would be blind and closed minded not to acknowledge that there are differences in systems, even when the technology is the same. These differences can be subtle, or they can be extensive. As we explore western systems and compare them with their brothers in battle from the east, we will see them."

Hell, or even comparing western systems to each other differences seem to emerge. For instance, some George Silver (un)love of the rapier, which had a lot of currency among other masters. Much less the difference between WMA and EMA.

Jay wrote: "As for the rapier in the west, that has to be attributed to a technological development that had no parallel in the east, so no corresponding combat system was ever developed in the east."

I am wondering if maybe we can't chalk up the differences between systems to factors like climate, culture and technology while the similaries come from the "universality" of human beings.

[Casper Bradak]

Just a little poll out of curiosity here. Who agrees with what the author has to say about the daggers in his article?
From what I've seen, the majority of surviving rondel daggers had at least one, often 2, sharp edges. And these are the ones that the pics in the manuals most resemble to my eyes.
I think most historical fencers are educated enough now to know that with swords, the very sharp edges are no hinderance to half swording, but do you think that is his reasoning with the daggers? Blade grabbing? Liability perhaps? I haven't found it a problem when practicing with sharp daggers.

[Jaron Bernstein]

The Vadi text illustrations have a lot of grabbing dagger blades, many thrust with said roundels, but very few cuts. I wonder that can tell us?

[Casper Bradak]

I think that's very understandable given the nature of the world and culture these arts were used in. Slicing with knives is next to useless in combat, or even vs. clothes. It's best left to summertime streetfighting. There's no time for goofing off in war. It's done quite often in modern street knife fighting, with short blades and no battle gear, but you won't see that getting people anywhere in the winter time or on a battlefield, despite combat knives sharp edges. And we all know you can safely grip sharp blades.

[Jared L. Cass]

I agree 100% Casper. Especially in reguards to winter clothing. If anybody hasn't tried it yet, just get an old jacket, sweater, ect and place it/them over some sort of target with some amount of give: like the arm of a sofa, a smoked ham, a heavy bag, ect. Then go to town trying to slash and cut through it. Slashes just aren't very useful against any sort of layered fabric. Then use the same knife and stab it. Bingo, you've got damage to what's under the clothing.

The blade grabs, too. While a wide blade like that of a bowie can still be grabbed, you'll most likely get some sort of cut (in my experience. If you're wearing even thin driving gloves, this isn't a problem what-so-ever). But with a narrow blade like that of a rondel, or a stereo-typical boot knife, you won't (the hand is able to envelope the whole blade and "distribute" the pressure from the edge).

Yep, other than a few, like that pictured in the artical, all rondels I've seen in books, museums, ect, had at least one edge and sort of an elongated triangular/wedge shaped cross section. Still able to cut as a general tool and IMO attack the backs of unarmored hands, wrists/neck if a guy is good, and the face, especially above/across the eyes (ie: damaged eyes/blood in the eyes= reduced vision=easier to kill advessary).

Just my thoughts. Thanks for bringing up that question/observation, Casper.

Jared L. Cass, ARMA Associate, Wisconsin

[leam hall]

"The blade grabs, too. While a wide blade like that of a bowie can still be grabbed, you'll most likely get some sort of cut (in my experience. If you're wearing even thin driving gloves, this isn't a problem what-so-ever). But with a narrow blade like that of a rondel, or a stereo-typical boot knife, you won't (the hand is able to envelope the whole blade and "distribute" the pressure from the edge)."

Not having a rondel or boot knife handy, I'm not sure how to test this statement. I'm fairly certain I'd not try it live, as I still have a small scar from a knife cut while goofing off as a kid.

I think the "summer streetfight" comment misses the mark as well. Armies fought during the warmer months of the year and soldiers had a bad habit of "forgetting" the heaviest pieces of armor or the bits they didn't feel like carrying. Certainly a knife sized weapon won't be the first choice for combat but there would probably be enough exposed skin or lightly protected targets if you were desperate. Given the delicate structure of the hand I'd not risk tendons or muscles grabbing a blade unless I was about to lose more than my hand.

I think a knife sized blade with an edge is probably a soldiers tool for camp life and could still, in dire need, be used to cut someone.

[Casper Bradak]

Well I never said the slice wasn't an option. It's there if you need it or you don't know any better. But you won't likely disable someone or give someone stitches through a t-shirt in a fight with one. It's a deadly waste of time in warfare. A duel/streetfight where you have time on your side may be a different story, one on one. Though a blade like that of a bowie or seax has enough mass to actually produce some type of cut, rather than just a weak slice.
I understand your apprehensions, but grabbing sharp blades is an integral part of many WMA techniques. Don't run your hand along the blade, and keep Newton's law in mind with double edged blades in particular, and you're likely to come out without a scratch.
And I fully agree with Jared about the usefulness of practice slicing with daggers. Most people only consier doing cuts with swords. But, people have just as many misconceptions about the functionality of other weapons, that practice cutting will help to remedy.

[Jared L. Cass]

"Not having a rondel or boot knife handy, I'm not sure how to test this statement. I'm fairly certain I'd not try it live, as I still have a small scar from a knife cut while goofing off as a kid."

You can test this in your kitchen as well. Get the biggest sharpest widest chef blade you have and a sharp steak knife or paring knife about an inch wide or so. Hold the knife in one hand and with the other, grab the blade and start to slowly increase pressure. If you do it slow and in a steady manner, you'll be able to feel just when the edge starts to bite. Stop there unless you want to gash your hand! <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> You'll notice that the wide blade will begin to bite after just a little while, but the narrower blade you should be able to fully and with alot of pressure, totally envelope. Plus, chances are, you won't get cut at all...or maybe just the simplest tiny nick. It's all about blade geometry. Sort of like the difference between a rapier blade (sharpened the first couple of inches near the tip) and a falchion blade.

As Casper said, for a blade to cut/slice, the edge needs to move across the target. In the manuals, you'll notice that when there are blade grabs shown, it's usually with the other hand controlling the wrist. Why? Because you are then better able to keep the advesary from trying to pull the knife loose. Like riding a bull. If you fight against his movements you're on the ground in 2 seconds flat. If you ride along with his movements to the best of your ability, you last alot longer. Does that make sense? Sorry for the wierd analogy.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying practice with live blades with a partner. That's a recipee for disaster. With a very very very well trusted partner, you can work with sharps if you are real deliberate and slow with your actions, though.

"I think the "summer streetfight" comment misses the mark as well. Armies fought during the warmer months of the year and soldiers had a bad habit of "forgetting" the heaviest pieces of armor or the bits they didn't feel like carrying. Certainly a knife sized weapon won't be the first choice for combat but there would probably be enough exposed skin or lightly protected targets if you were desperate. Given the delicate structure of the hand I'd not risk tendons or muscles grabbing a blade unless I was about to lose more than my hand."

I have to respectfull disagree with you here. I can't say I've ever seen a piece of historical art work detailing a battle where there are bare chested guys running around (I know you're not saying exactly this). Everybody has at least some form of tunic on. Give the cloth/fabric test cutting a try. You'll see what we're talking about here. If it came down to fighting with a dagger during a battle, could a guy try and cut an enemy in an unarmored/bare skin area? Sure. But imediatly after that the other guy will probably just take it, grapple, and stab the other guy. Remember, it's a desperate situation where one little mistake could kill. Better to go with something proven to cause lots of damage and get the guy under the clothing. Again, give the test cutting a try and see what you discover.

I'm glad you brought up your doubts. I'm not sure if we've discussed this here yet <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Jared L. Cass, ARMA Associate, Wisconsin