A Question on Medieval Two-Weapon Fighting

[JeanryChandler]

foyning fence? Can you elaborate on that a bit?

DB

[JohnGallego]

Foyning refers to swordplay emphasizing the thrust. The rapier combat of the renaissance fits the bill, IIRC.

[Jaron Bernstein]

"Didn't the Spanish infantry in the Renaissance use sword and buckler, with notable effect against pike formations? That is a pretty similar style to sword and dagger. In fact I think the Spanish often used fairly short swords. If I remember correctly the Italians had some light sword and buckler infantry as well."


The Spanish sword and buckler tactic was devised during the wars of Italy after they first enountered the Swiss pike formations and came off badly. The idea was to use the buckler to get past the pike (or halbard) head and then run up the shaft to where the polarm wasn't useful and also to disrupt the pike formation so it can't fight as the devastating "porcupine" team effort.

The S&B tactic by the Spanish fell out of use as they developed better shot (guns) to go with their shock (melee weapons) and came up with the tercio to take on the Swiss mercenaries, who mainly relied on shock (and those pikes were by all accounts really fearsome, to say nothing of their wielders). The modern image we have of Switzerland (chocolate and Heidi yodeling in the meadows) is rather different than how they were regarded at the time.

[JeanryChandler]

Yes, I've been doing some rather intensive study of the Swiss Reislauffer, and of other period mercenaries such as the Landsknechts, (who attempted to emulate them), and the compelling Irish / Norse Gallowglass. Learning how to defeat the Swiss was a major issue in those days indeed!

It has been very interesting to me to learn that contrary to the official History I was taught wherein Europe was always dominated by Monarchs and their knightly armies of armed aristocrats, in this period the Med was often ruled by the navy of the Venetian Republic, and the most powerful army in Europe was that of the Helvetic Confederacy.

DB

[JeanryChandler]

Regarding foyning, thanks for the definition, I was unfamiliar with the term. I have a comment here though which will probably be unpopular. There seems to be a prevalent belief among many fencers, WMA practitioners and spathologists / hoplologists that daggers were effective in defense only for dealing with the thrust. I was told this on this very board when I posted some sparring clips once, and I believed it.

That is, until I did more research and a few experiments. One of the first things I did when I finally got my first blunt was to put this to the test. I tried deflecting strikes from a paul chen practical viking sword with a cheap stainless steel pugio dagger replica with surprising success. Contrary to what I had been told, the weapon did not slip past or over the guard, nor snap the blade (though it did get nicked up). When I managed to borrow some steel gauntlets and arm protection, I tried the same experiment with my (4 lb) heimrick longsword and the same cheapie stainless steel pugio replica. I had the same result.

This is hardly a scientific experiment, but it has influenced by thinking. Since then, in looking at woodcuts of sword and dagger fencing, and the construction of the many parrying daggers themselves, I believe those weapons were intended to deflect strikes as well as thrusts.

It is much easier to deflect a thrust than a strike with a dagger, and deflecting (rather than hard parrying) strikes does expose the hand. But if you have a dagger with a 'close guard' (as silver reccomends in one line) or a gauntlet, it is certainly viable, and in any case better than being struck in your body. It is also possible to take some of the force of the blow with your sword, and then use the dagger to beat or bind.

Just a few thoughts,

J

[Ryan Ricks]

i've played a little sword and dagger vs. sword and dagger with joel thompson of ARMA VAB. although i really know nothing about this formally, i was able to stop some cutting attacks from his sword on my dagger. i was using a sword hilted dagger, with broad a blade, held in a hammer grip. i found the best way was to try to catch his sword on the stark of the dagger next to the guard.

although it seemed to work, it was difficult. joel was using a rondel type dagger in an icepick type grip. he obviously knew what he was doing, and gave me a rough time of it.

ryan

[Casper Bradak]

I don't think anyone will argue daggers are useless for stopping strikes, particularly in the "shield", combined with a sword, or when stifling.
But your experiences are directly opposite mine. I've proven this before to people who thought they could "peter pan" against a sword. It may work sparring with wasters or blunts, but you'll hardly be generating lethal force in that situation.
Stand in a safe measure, like movie fighting, and hold out the dagger. Have someone with a sword cut at the imaginary you behind it, forcefully, while you try to stop it. Every time I've done this, one of three things happens. The dagger is blown through, the dagger goes flying, or it bends or breaks.
It's difficult enough to recieve a forceful longsword blow with a shortsword, much less a shortsword blow with a dagger.

[JeanryChandler]

I don't parry precisely that way, I wouldn't parry precisely that way with a sword either 90% of the time. But essentially, the test I did was not dissimilar to what you describe, with the exception that the deflection was not static. I found it fairly easy to stop the viking sword and even a longsword (I'm not sure what you mean by a short sword)

I'll get a video clip of this next time we get together for sparring, hopeflly this weekend, and post it here.

J

[Tony_Indurante]

Di Grassi would disagree with you. He believed that the dagger was suitable to stop any sword strike (actually he says any weapon)- provided you stop it close to the hand (the 1st part of the sword) and never try to stop it on the 3rd or 4th parts of the sword, where the weapon's force is strongest.

Explanation- di Grassi divides the sword (and any weapon really) into 4 parts- 1 and 2 are the parts closest to the hand, and are therefore the weakest when you strike, while 3 and 4 are farther from the hand and therefore the strongest when you strike.

[Casper Bradak]

In that case he wouldn't be disagreeing, see my whole post.

[Casper Bradak]

If it's working with intent, then you can't be doing it the way I described. It must be closer to one of the 3 former methods. And you're right, you shouldn't recieve blows like that with dagger or sword.
By shortsword I mean single hand sword or arming sword.
You weren't clear on how you were doing it (could still use a description). But it's almost physically impossible to statically block with such a less substantial weapon in the more substantial weapons ideal striking point, which is what I'm used to contradicting.

[Tony_Indurante]

you're right, I miss read that part of your post

[JeanryChandler]

Yeah, I don't know exactly how to describe it nor the precise technical terms, but it works about the same way with both steel and with padded weapons (I don't use wasters much). One way is to meet the attack with both weapons, the sword and the dagger, and use the dagger to redirect. Another way, for certain blows (generally aimed at your middle), is to intercept with the dagger close to the daggers hilt, and kind of slide it down the opponents blade while turning it aside. If you meet it at the right angle, it seems to work well.

J

[JeanryChandler]

Can you describe these three methods?

J

[Roger Soucy]

Casper,
If you catch the sword strike in the crook of the stark of the dagger and the guard, provided your guard is not just for show, the sword strike, at any power will not "blow through" or break the dagger. Ideally this is best accomplished by striking the incoming blade in a slightly downward motion with the long edge of the dagger. That movement should put the dagger in the correct angle.

I quickly sketched the catch... (please, no comments on diagram quality)


Now, your angle has to be right, and your aim has to be perfect or else you'll lose a hand.

As for blocking a strike statically.. I can't accept that this is a valid way to assess the potential of using the dagger as an off hand weapon as you really shouldn't be blocking statically with any weapon. But if you must, a dagger is a lot less expensive to replace than a sword.