|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 23, 2019 19:21:44 GMT
Will the longsword feel lighter and/or expend less energy than the saber because of two hands on the grip and the increased leverage, or will the more generally lighter saber feel lighter? I'm going off of this video by Shadiversity: Single handed swords in general require more energy and strength to use unless you go to the extremes of either weight and size scale, like a montante or smallsword, At least in my own experience of 2 years of longsword, 4 of sabre, and a somewhat under a year of rapier.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on May 23, 2019 19:23:57 GMT
Will the longsword feel lighter and/or expend less energy than the saber because of two hands on the grip and the increased leverage, or will the more generally lighter saber feel lighter? How the weapon feels in the hand during dry handling is not the same how it feels during actual “fighting”. Especially the longsword must be used with strength to unfold its full effectiveness.
A light (one handed) saber (or a one-handed blade above a certain weight in general) tires out certain muscle areas (shoulder/forearm), which on the other hand are build up rather quickly with practise. The (light) longsword takes more out of your body, but the demands are more “spread” so to speak (sorry, English is my second language).
OTOH, it will be much better at overwhelming the opponent quickly, better vs. polearms, better at wrestling applications, better vs. multiple opponents than a saber. In general it’s both better at a “pressuring the opponent style” and an “evading and striking from distance” style of fighting than the saber.
What it`s not so good at is in what you see very often on youtube videos of mixed fight settings (e.g. saber vs. longsword), namely hanging out with rather lazy footwork in half distance facing nimble swords with good hand protection (just speaking of the weapon characteristics, of course it depends on mindset, skill and tactic).
So shortly put, the longsword is the much more “martial” weapon, both better suited for people of light and heavy build (but requires pressuring and/or luring the opponent with passing steps) than the saber (specialized for use from horseback and “fencing salle” linear footwork) in the scenario you described.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on May 23, 2019 19:58:29 GMT
On the other side, how often do you expect to face a real swordfight?
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 23, 2019 20:05:38 GMT
I don't know that I would call one more martial than another, they're both appropriate to war or fighting and most sabres are swords specifically designed for field warfare (aside from the outlier dueling swords) with most manuals coming from that mindset.
The linear footwork in sabre developed more for the thought of an officer needing to fight in line with his men or alongside them, and not so much from sporting endeavour.
|
|
|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on May 23, 2019 20:11:55 GMT
I find footwork to definitely be more freeing with a one handed sword. In longsword system if you throw a cut you MUST move your feet otherwise the cut from the other side won't make much sense. In one handed systems you can more or less stay in the same stance and throw far more variety of cuts.
So one handed swords actually allow for more freeing movement and footwork due to the freedom you have with cuts vs. changing your stance
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on May 23, 2019 20:29:12 GMT
I don't know that I would call one more martial than another, they're both appropriate to war or fighting and most sabres are swords specifically designed for field warfare (aside from the outlier dueling swords) with most manuals coming from that mindset. The linear footwork in sabre developed more for the thought of an officer needing to fight in line with his men or alongside them, and not so much from sporting endeavour. i agree. Sabers saw far more military use than dueling.... arguably that's not as true for longsword which were a very popular fencing sword, but always in the minority when it came to battlefield weapons in its own time.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Paunch on May 23, 2019 20:48:48 GMT
Consider something along the lines of a glaive, shorter naginata, nagimaki. Yeah. Good point. I like that long handle dao i got some weeks ago... i might try to find something with a little longer blade and a little onger handle. I think if i could just cut off half of the shaft of my Hanwei Pudao i might get somewhere...
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on May 23, 2019 21:45:16 GMT
The one handed cut-n‘-thrust sword’s strength is its nimbleness. That includes footwork. One-hand sword footwork does not have to linear, of course (plenty historical sources show passing footwork, especially the older ones).
One handed swords are best with an offhand item (shield, gun, reins). They`re good at quick parrying (freedom of movement due to feet and arm being able to act rather separately, assisted by a side-on stance especially when used single > reducing target), provocations, disengages and counter-cuts. All good for dueling. Good as a back-up weapon due to ease of carry.
If you think you need stopping/controlling power (e.g. winding vs. polearms) use two hands for reach and leverage, and passing footwork to transfer/absorb full body power through/from the weapon (best with polearms, if you want a sidearm > longsword).
Of course that`s not to be confused with performance of weapons due to singular characteristics (resulting in a wide-bladed cutlass cutting better than a slender longsword, for example).
|
|
|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on May 23, 2019 21:47:57 GMT
I don't know that I would call one more martial than another, they're both appropriate to war or fighting and most sabres are swords specifically designed for field warfare (aside from the outlier dueling swords) with most manuals coming from that mindset. The linear footwork in sabre developed more for the thought of an officer needing to fight in line with his men or alongside them, and not so much from sporting endeavour. i agree. Sabers saw far more military use than dueling.... arguably that's not as true for longsword which were a very popular fencing sword, but always in the minority when it came to battlefield weapons in its own time. How does an arming sword compare to a saber? By itself, I mean.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on May 23, 2019 21:53:06 GMT
i agree. Sabers saw far more military use than dueling.... arguably that's not as true for longsword which were a very popular fencing sword, but always in the minority when it came to battlefield weapons in its own time. How does an arming sword compare to a saber? By itself, I mean. By itself? Not great. Arming swords were intended to be used with a buckler or shield. If you take that away there isn't a system to go off of, so you just wind up using it like a less optimized Messer or saber.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 23, 2019 21:58:20 GMT
i agree. Sabers saw far more military use than dueling.... arguably that's not as true for longsword which were a very popular fencing sword, but always in the minority when it came to battlefield weapons in its own time. How does an arming sword compare to a saber? By itself, I mean. In my own opinion poorly as they are meant for different things. An arming sword was made to be used with a shield while a sabre is perfectly at home by itself or with another complement, as it was used in the 19th century alone with pistol, dirk, and dhal buckler. The arming sword usually lacks the hand protection offered by most sabres, having only a cross guard for most of its history will the sabre quickly adopted at the very least a knuckle bow. That's my opinion. You do get some sabres with only cross guards in the early era and some arming swords with a knuckle bow in the later era but by and large the two have pretty different hand protection.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 23, 2019 21:59:20 GMT
elbrittania39 also brings up a good point that they don't have a manual by themselves so you would just end up using them like a different weapon.
|
|
|
Post by leviathansteak on May 23, 2019 23:04:34 GMT
I find footwork to definitely be more freeing with a one handed sword. In longsword system if you throw a cut you MUST move your feet otherwise the cut from the other side won't make much sense. In one handed systems you can more or less stay in the same stance and throw far more variety of cuts. So one handed swords actually allow for more freeing movement and footwork due to the freedom you have with cuts vs. changing your stance That isnt really true. You can uncouple your footwork from your cuts. E.g. left leg forward and cut from right to left. Once you have this down your versatility and 'flow' in sparring will increase substantially. You'll see this disconcordant footwork in marozzo's montante/spadone all the time.
|
|
|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on May 23, 2019 23:23:05 GMT
I find footwork to definitely be more freeing with a one handed sword. In longsword system if you throw a cut you MUST move your feet otherwise the cut from the other side won't make much sense. In one handed systems you can more or less stay in the same stance and throw far more variety of cuts. So one handed swords actually allow for more freeing movement and footwork due to the freedom you have with cuts vs. changing your stance That isnt really true. You can uncouple your footwork from your cuts. E.g. left leg forward and cut from right to left. Once you have this down your versatility and 'flow' in sparring will increase substantially. You'll see this disconcordant footwork in marozzo's montante/spadone all the time. I didn't know that you could do that. That changes a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2019 1:43:29 GMT
It was impressed upon me and I am in accordance with the notion that one should be able to effectively execute any attack or defense from any angle or position.
There are certain set-ups and configurations that are more optimized or maybe better said conducive than others.
There's also safety considerations to take into account so even though I don't care about leading leg or whatever, I can recognize and respect that for folks who don't train or aren't familiar with certain positions to err on the side of caution.
Whatever you do, be smart and work it out. Don't test new material in a live fire environment.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on May 24, 2019 2:22:56 GMT
It was impressed upon me and I am in accordance with the notion that one should be able to effectively execute any attack or defense from any angle or position. There are certain set-ups and configurations that are more optimized or maybe better said conducive than others. There's also safety considerations to take into account so even though I don't care about leading leg or whatever, I can recognize and respect that for folks who don't train or aren't familiar with certain positions to err on the side of caution. Whatever you do, be smart and work it out. Don't test new material in a live fire environment. Some rules may not apply to your system but they do in others. Saber is built on lunge and recover footwork so you can't just tune out which leg you're leading with or the whole system crumbles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2019 2:56:04 GMT
It was impressed upon me and I am in accordance with the notion that one should be able to effectively execute any attack or defense from any angle or position. There are certain set-ups and configurations that are more optimized or maybe better said conducive than others. There's also safety considerations to take into account so even though I don't care about leading leg or whatever, I can recognize and respect that for folks who don't train or aren't familiar with certain positions to err on the side of caution. Whatever you do, be smart and work it out. Don't test new material in a live fire environment. Some rules may not apply to your system but they do in others. Saber is built on lunge and recover footwork so you can't just tune out which leg you're leading with or the whole system crumbles. As always - if you are working within a system, whatever that system dictates is the absolute truth as far as you the practitioner are concerned. Like anyone else, I have my own opinions but I am a strong believer in systems as a construct, and will endeavor to not argue with anyone from the context of their structured approach. From a system or traditional lineage, what someone can or cannot do is irrelevent. What the system tells you to do is all that matters. It's like knowing that a Knight can move laterally one space and linearly two spaces or vice versa. That's awesome and cool to know, but totally irrelevant when discussing checkers or any other game.
|
|
|
Post by schnitzelsandwich on May 25, 2019 1:53:08 GMT
If the Cossacks use the shashka one handed and the Hungarians used a one handed saber and nothing else as well (dating back all the way to the Magyars), couldn't that mean you could use an arming sword and nothing else?
|
|
|
Post by leviathansteak on May 25, 2019 2:02:58 GMT
If the Cossacks use the shashka one handed and the Hungarians used a one handed saber and nothing else as well (dating back all the way to the Magyars), couldn't that mean you could use an arming sword and nothing else? Well you sure can. Its just that your hands are an easy target due to the simple hilt. If you know what you're doing, the crossguard can be sufficient for protection but you know, mistakes happen and then you're a finger short. Id definitely opt for a shield/buckler if possible.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on May 25, 2019 5:51:30 GMT
If the Cossacks use the shashka one handed and the Hungarians used a one handed saber and nothing else as well (dating back all the way to the Magyars), couldn't that mean you could use an arming sword and nothing else? One thing I'd point out, is both those weapons are light cavalry swords, in other words, they were used in hit and run style horseman tactics primarily. You don't need a guard that badly when you're carving up fleeing infantry or just scouting around for intel. Also early hussars and sipahi cavalry did sometimes used domed round shields in addition to their sabers.
|
|