Rich Morris' Comics - YAFGC and The ComixBlog

Based on a subject that came up in the "Stalker of Norfolk", historic fencing vs. modern Olympic style fencing vs. SCA fencing or recreation fencing. Discuss.

Just a question: we consider fencing the kind of swordplay done with rapiers only? Or would you call it fencing even the participants wield lightsabers or two handed swords?

Well, the subject is "Historic Sword Fighting," so if I were in charge (which, ya know... clearly I'm not), I'd say any of it belongs in this thread.

...unless you were simply asking a terminology question? In which case I'll just shut up...

.






yeah, I know, a lot of quotes. But I know pretty much nothing about fencing and got really curious about where the idea of the lanterns being held with the oft hand came from. My first thought was that extremely chivalrous of the dueler to expose himself to his opponent that way - but then I hear it is just really street fighters trying to gut their enemy, not about being chivalrous, and I immediately had doubts.

Typically one might read in an old western about someone foolish enough to raise a lantern to look around at enemy activity when they hear a noise at night - and having made themselves a wonderfully well lit target with a lantern hung above them, they promptly get shot at by enemies lurking in the dark.

I would think the same principle applies in fencing in a narrow alley, you are exposing yourself, well lit from behind, with your shadow blocking your own light on an enemy . Sure you hold it to the side to get the most of it, but you’re revealing your entire stance, body targets and where your sword is. Your enemy might be kind enough to light himself up as well, but surely the first person to dump his own lantern wins.

The dagger idea then naturally made more sense, esp if you are in an alley and hoping your enemy doesn’t have his allies sneaking up behind you, but I see some form of swords play already believes that, only in certain situations.

The other idea that I got today, from looking at the action in the Stalker of Norfolk comic, that they might be holding up their cloaks (esp in bad weather) to keep themselves from entangling it in the trash filled alleys and possibly hoping to use it to entangle someone else’s weapon, should they be lunged at or attacked from behind.

The idea of using it as balance in lunge works, or in ship fighting where you might be on a swaying ground in a narrow galley and grip a rope or railing - or warding off a beam from a sail ..

But since you, and Hilary, (and a lot of the readers) have all surely covered these questions in years of conversations with fencers and history folk, I was curious why the lantern theory won out, as you mentioned there is some historical reasoning behind it, tho no proof.

Experience mostly. I never found holding my hand back out over my head to be of any real ballistic use when lunging or en garde or anything. It's more comfortable to do it sabre-style with your hand resting on your hip (Incidently, sabre originated as a horseback style. You don't hit below the waist to prevent hurting your opponent's horse!). If you're fencing with a cloak, you keep it in front of you because it's such a slow, wind resistant weapon there's no way to bring it around from behind in time to be of any use. Not to mention the limited space there would have been in an alley.

The idea was that fencing was illegal so if you had a score to settle with someone, you'd challenge them, they'd accept (so that you don't have an instigator and a victim) and then take it out of public view (in the city, a nearby alley). Lanterns raised behind the head lit the perpetually sun-blocked alley because the battle is all about the feet and swordplay. The tactic doesn't consider an ambush by reinforcements. To arrange that would really put you on the wrong side of the law. And we're talking about the time of true corporal punishments here. Death sentences as drawn out executions. The real fun stuff.

Well, Jeff said that you aren't supposed to hold it above you when you lunge, but extend it back behind you as a counter balance - that was the bit that made sense to me. I can see your point of holding a hand high not helping at all during a lunge - I think it would make it considerablly harder to maintain that height while moving the rest of you forward.

So .. illegal duelers would be chilverous enough to light themselves, and though they are breaking the law, not rotten enough to break other parts of the law with buddies coming from behind?

I can see that sort of mind set might exist ... sort of a variation of honor among theives, honor among law breaking duelists.... just to my mind you'd set the lanterns down in front of you and hope to keep the light on the opponant more than yourself. But maybe that wasnt chilverous behavior of the day.

Co-incidentally, the creator of the webcomic Zona - Warrior Princess
http://www.soulgeek.com/comics/zona/2009/12/04/page-328/#comments
posted the following in his comments as his story is now presenting a ritualized fencing scene:

Real street-fencing of the period was an excercise in trying to skewer the other fellow through the eye as quickly as possible, and the fights were very bloody and usually as short as a drive-by shooting, which they resembled greatly in character. Broadsword fighting is based on removing the other fellow’s limbs or else opening him up so he bleeds himself out through a major artery, and again is usually not a prolonged fight. All the wonderful athletic showmanship we love and which you can expect to see as much of as I can deliver is absolute theater and little else. Those among you who are actually critiquing it from that POV will soon find much to pick at, though I hope it doesn’t distract you from the storyline too much. I always had a chuckle at the over-the-top chop-sockey stuff in Hercules and Xena, or the superheroics of Buffy but it was still fun.

I really liked that!

Sounds like someone's having fun with his work - tho he's talking more about Greek and Roman style swords fighting the kind we're seeing in this comic - hacking away at each other fits right in with all the Greek myths of the time <g>

Well Zona is set in a medieval world, with his heroine coming from a Celtic like culture and her opponent from a more courtly environment. Her name sounds like Zena but the whole style he is using is far from Greek/Roman or the (very entertaining) television bastardizations of them. He is right about one thing: fans do not want to see efficiency, they want a show! How fun would Erol Flynn be if he won with a single thrust ?

I'm not really knowledgeable on the matter but took some time to read what Wikipedia has to say about it and found three more or less interesting articles, as well as two translated Medieval manuscripts:

- WP: Historical European Martial Arts (not only focused on swords but largely so)
- WP: German school of swordmanship: ... puts much emphasis on simplicity, speed and efficiency...
-WP: Italian school of swordmanship: ... a few fundamental traits have remained constant in the Italian school. Some of these are the preference for certain guards, the preoccupation with time (or "tempo") in fencing as well as many of the defensive actions.
- Royal Armouries manuscript I.33: lessons of a monk fencer to some pupils. 13th or 14th century.
- Hanko Döbringer fechtbuch from 1389 (Cod.HS.3227a). The parts compiled in this PDF deal with sword combat mainly, both on horse (armored and unarmored) and on foot (unarmored, most extense part).


I.33 illustration: monk and pupil practicing fencing


I.33 illustration: monk and female pupil (named Walpurgis) practicing fencing


Two unarmored swordsmen on foot from HS.3227a.

Hope it helps.

Beautiful. But did women practiced swordplay? I doubt that this would be common.

Enough of them must have had access to training. There were a lot of little known incidents of women becoming great fighters.

Like Boudeica (or however you spell her name) for one of many examples.

But she did come from a tribe that allowed women to fight until they were married -i think most Celts of the Brittish Isles had that kind of tradition- and she was a leader, a queen. What about women after the year 800 AD? I mostly have in mind urban areas of course, but would a fencing teacher in the dark ages accept a female pupil unless the circumstances were extraordinary?

It does look kind of exceptional. For what I could read, it is understood by some that the Monk (possibly a retired knight) gave his lessons mostly oriented to self-defense. It is also likely that Walpurgis was noble.

Women's status anyhow varied a lot, though in all cases we can talk of Patriarchy in Medieval (and probably Antique) Europe. In general the West, with a more barbarian and to some extent less deeply Indoeuropean background, tended to allow more freedom to women, specially in areas a little away from the "civilization centers" (if we can talk of such thing in the Middle Ages). A region that has some fame of "Medieval feminism" is Occitania (southern France), the core of troubadour phenomenon, which is argued to be in itself a reaction to excessive Patriarchalism in Romano-Germanic Middle Ages culture. It is also said that Shakespeare's British women (early Modern but close enough) show levels of freedom unheard of in other places. Basque hypothetical "matriarchy" has been demolished but still, by all accounts, within a patriarchal system, women status was much better than among most neighbors.

I think that modern feminism and in general the modern relative improvement of women's rights do have certain roots in some sections of Medieval society. Notice also that witch-hunts (mostly an Early Modern, not Medieval, phenomenon) were largely oriented to erode the status of women (or at least some women) as herborists and midwifes (and favor male physicians, who in that time were essentially erudite ignorants).

That is interesting - one hears vague mentions of 'shield maidens' and that woman of the castle was expected to handle it's defenses (usually thru a man in her charge, but she'd have to know some strategy and basic fighting to okay his suggestions, or handle herself when they were short manned) ..but I never knew how much that was based on real history vs romantic tales. I figured it was somewhat true on a practical level - if you're in a castle/hold/home that requires a lot of defense, every able body, even the maids, would be expected to have some notion how to fend off attackers.