Sword Play?

Lafayette

Man of Artistic Fingers
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
656
Location
Phoenix, Arizona
I was doing some research for my novel using youtube on sword fighting and I of course watched some scenes from movies (including Robin Hood starring Errol Flynn) and was entertained. Nonetheless, I was wondering how true to life they were and so I went to some Olympiadic fencing and much to my chagrin discover that real fencing matches were over in mere seconds.

Does what I saw square up with real sword combat of 1392-1482? How far fetched are the movies?
 
Whoah - you *don't* want to be looking at film for examples of sword combat. Stage combat is done purely for performance, not realism.

If you want to know anything about mediaeval swords and swordfighting, these three YouTube channels are packed with stuff:
Lindybeige
Skallagrim
scholagladiatoria
 
I'm not an expert on any of this, but I don't think in 1392-1482 swordfighting would have been very much like Olympic fencing - at least not with foils, rapiers and so on. Swords from then tend to be broader and chunkier, and would probably have been slower to swing. The style would have been more about cutting with the edge (and bludgeoning from the impact) than jabbing as with a fencing foil. The amount of formal skill involved rather than just angry hacking seems to be uncertain - however, by about 1500 serious books were being written about swordfighting techniques, and it was considered a proper martial art (as was the use of the quarterstaff).

If there was a golden age of rapiers, foils etc, it was probably later - at least 1650. The weapons carried by musketeers would do - there's a lot of fencing in The Three Musketeers. They tended to wear less armour and society was a bit more sophisticated, which meant that carting around a big broadsword was less useful or socially acceptable, especially in cities.

Also, having done a bit of fencing a while ago, the aim of a fencing match is to score hits on the body of the opponent. You're not allowed to move around half as much (a shame) and everything is much more formalised, so a quick exchange of attacks might only take a couple of seconds before a hit is scored (and of course you're not trying to kill each other!).
 
Your average movie is *not* what makes a realistic sword fight, no.

Neither is modern fencing. Modern fencing is a sport and nobody gets hurt, so people take far greater risks than they would in an actual fight. There's also far less space to move in.

Not to mention, as already said, fencing is a very bad analogue for late medieval sword fighting anyway. That style of sword just isn't in use.

While I do recommend going to look at what the re-enactors are doing, if you do want to see some movies with actual realistic combat in, then for the period, I'd actually recommend Monty Python and the Holy Grail - the scene with the Black Knight is generally held up as a pretty dang realistic. Well, the fighting bit anyway.

For the fencing, the Duellists is held up as a good one.
 
As everyone has said, movies are entertainment, not sword-fighting training manuals.

There were, however, training manuals (and fencing schools) very early on for those who wished to master the art -- there is at least one German Fechtbuch from as early as the late C13th/early C14th and its quality suggests it's drawing on predecessors -- and these might be worth researching if you are interested in getting the right terminology etc. Done properly sword fighting wasn't simply bash and thump, even with the great swords, as if the blade were no more than a blunt instrument -- there were prescribed stances/guards and defensive and offensive movements.

To start at the beginning, what kind of fighting are you thinking about? For the most part people didn't wander around carrying swords in the C15th, certainly not in the early part of it, so if you're thinking street fighting, then for most it's at best long knives, not swords. (Though the difference between the two can become blurred cf the cinquedea Cinquedea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) Swords were a weapon of war, and largely limited to wartime use, and remained so for the majority of the population. From The Noble Art of the Sword by Dr Tobias Capwell (curator of arms and armour at the Wallace Collection in London):
... the wearing of swords in a civilian context was not considered acceptable, so their use in peacetime was only reluctantly tolerated by urban communities. The 13th statute of Edward 1 (1284-85) outlawed fencing schools in the City of London... In 1386 the newly founded University of Heidelberg forbade its students from attending the local fencing schools, a regulation that had to be re-enacted in 1415.
and he goes onto give examples of people being brought up on charges eg "for swaggering in the City with sword and buckler after nightfall". And
It was acceptable to wear a sword ... when travelling, for purposes of personal protection, but wearing swords as a matter of course in an urban environment was frowned upon if not explicitly illegal. Despite the fact that the sword had, by the 12th century (if not earlier) come into widespread use among commoners as well as the nobility, its aristocratic mystique remained... A good sword was still an expensive object; quality steel was a rare commodity and the ability to forge it into a hardened and tempered blade was even rarer. Expert use of the sword required years of dedicated, daily practice, which in turn demanded the sort of time that few could afford.
So your average oik isn't going to have one, certainly not one of any quality.

Secondly, what kind of sword were you thinking of giving your characters? Fighting with a doublehander is very different from using an arming sword, which is different from a cinquedea, which is different from a rapier. Again from The Noble Art
Until the 15th century, swords designed to be wielded in one hand, to deliver both cutting and thrusting attacks, were rarely if ever used by themselves. Rather, the shield was their constant partner... Sword-and-buckler was a highly successful fighting style, remaining popular throughout the 15th and 16th centuries. On the medieval battlefield it was the most prominent non-noble form of swordfighting, while the use of the bigger war swords, the longsword or the two-handed or "great" sword, was reserved for fully armoured knights and men-at-arms.

From the fact you've looked at Olympic fencing, I'm guessing you're probably thinking of equipping your characters with rapiers, which are the go-to swords for films, since they are long and sexy. But these are not swords which were around in the C15th in Europe. By around 1520, men of elevated social status, ie noblemen and perhaps the more affluent middle classes, had begun to wear swords at all times, effectively as another sign of fashion and wealth. The rapier as we now think of it arose from this civilian use, as fashion and the circumstances in which it might be used (not in the melee of war with opponents in armour) brought about a change in blade shape. There's no definitive this-is-the-date-a-rapier-was-first-used since there was a constant evolution, but it's probably not until the 1540s that it's the long thrusting weapon we think of, and as Toby has said, it's the C17th which is its heyday.

Having said that, if you're writing fantasy as opposed to historical fiction, there's no reason your society can't have introduced a rapier-type some 50 years earlier, and frankly I doubt your average reader would worry about it either way.
 
Amongst my many misadventures I've done a little historical european longsword fencing. This is very different than modern fencing, and the weapon is much wider and heavier. The techniques are designed to kill or disable the opponent as fast as possible, and involve grappling moves and barehand striking where that will end the fight faster. Boughts are usually over in handful of moves. Personally, I'd recommend starting at the 'useful links' page of Dawn Duellists website (here Useful links - Dawn Duellists Society (DDS)), the club I used to go to. The instructors a re pretty helpful when it copmes to answering questions, and Martin is an authour by day job so might be worth contacting (Instructors :: Dawn Duellists Society (DDS)).
 
Apologies for double posting [ah, not double-posted after all, thanks to StilLearning!] but I've found a quote I was looking for in connection with Toby's broadly correct comment about the style of fighting with the wider-bladed swords being more about cutting with the edge rather than "jabbing". Again from The Noble Art
Although it is true that swords of the Migration period and early Middle Ages heavily prioritize the cut over the thrust, the latter's clear effectiveness against armour was already evident. At the battle of Benevento [Italy 1266]... an Angevin army... defeated the heavily armed German knights... [partly] due to their sharply pointed swords which they used, with the cry of "à l'Estoc!" ("use the point"), to pierce the weak points of their enemies' armour. Not long after, the Italian nobleman Giles of Rome... wrote... that thrusting was a better mode of attack because it penetrated mail armour more easily than cutting, giving deeper and more lethal wounds while having to destroy a much smaller area of the armoured defence. [Because a thrust focuses all the power of the blow into the tiny area of the tip of the blade, rather than distributing it over the wider area of the cutting edge] By the 14th century, a sword had developed that was exclusively a stabbing weapon. Called an "estoc", "tucke", or "tuck" this new, narrow-bladed weapon had no cutting edges; it was a long steel spike fitted with a sword hilt.
The tuck becomes a secondary weapon of armoured cavalry, and there's a German woodcut c1512-16 showing it being used by a knight on horseback to stab an opponent in the throat.

And relating to the great swords, this might be of interest, too:
Perhaps the most misunderstood of all swords, the two-handed sword has usually, in modern times, been viewed as the ultimate icon of medieval barbarity, the tool of... "The rough untutored fighting of the Middle Ages" which relied on "brute force" where "strength was lauded more than skill". In fact, the style of fight appropriate to the two-handed sword was no less subtle, cunning or intricate than that for the sword and buckler or rapier and dagger. The weight of the weapon may have been somewhat greater, but a good "great sword" was extremely well-balanced, allowing the weapon to move easily in the hands, It is significant that the three earliest fencing manuscripts written in English should all deal exclusively with the complexities of two-handed sword-fighting, describing carefully arranged sequences of moves using a common technical language found nowhere else in the fencing literature.
 
As far as this relates to writing, a lot of it depends on the tone of the novel you’re looking to do. In older fantasy, characters were able to give and receive numerous wounds before they stopped, the way a Dungeons and Dragons character can still function with three-quarters of his hit points gone: in more “realistic” stories, characters may be incapacitated by a single blow*. It all depends on what you want. While it would be bizarre and not a very good idea to fight a knight in full plate armour with a fencing foil, I think you can get away with whatever you like so long as it’s well written and doesn’t fly in the face of basic logic (which the knight/fencing foil example probably would). It’s clear that a skilled swordfighter could exist in a medieval-type setting, although he would be armed and trained more like a samurai than a fencer. Alternatively, a fantasy version of The Three Musketeers, with a suitably large amount of swashbuckling, would probably be brilliant if you got the tone right.

*"Realistic" is a bit of a vague term. To me, believable fantasy doesn’t just mean depicting a point in history accurately and then dumping some wizards and the odd dragon on top of it. A society that had those things in it would have developed rather differently, even if it ended up looking a bit like medieval society at the end.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top