Skip to content(if available)orjump to list(if available)

I Never Cared Much for Swords. Then I Had to Fight with One

cjs_ac

The thing about martial arts is that they work: if you do them properly, you're going to kill someone (or be killed). Every group that does stuff with swords, therefore, has to sacrifice something to ensure that everyone can have fun again next week.

In HEMA, it's the aesthetic that's sacrificed: we (I'm one of them) wear gear that makes us look like modern riot police, but the weapons are (at the very least) historically weighted, and the techniques are from historical fencing manuals. There's a lot of arguing over the interpretation of medieval manuscripts in the community.

Re-enactment groups wear historical clothing, so they have to reduce the scope of their combat: they typically disallow strikes to the head, for example.

The Society for Creative Anachronism dispense with everything but the aesthetic of history, and consequently have the most fun.

amelius

More generally, someone who plays with swords is more likely to die by a sword than any random person. Therefore, maybe better to stay away from them.

falcor84

As with any physical activity, a person who plays with swords every week likely significantly reduces their all-cause mortality compared to spending that time sedentary. So if that's your jam and gets you active, enjoy it.

some_random

Yeah and someone who swims at the beach is more likely to drown than any random person.

vkou

There's an old Soviet proverb.

Those who can't swim don't drown.

eviks

Maybe in the future you could have no sacrifices by fighting a android that is programmed not to hit strongly enough to inflict harm, and is too tough to be "killed" itself even in regular armor...

latexr

That would be equivalent to only being able to play chess against a computer, so plenty of people would be left unsatisfied. That said, I like the direction you’re going.

Since we’re going the science fiction route of letting imagination run wild, perhaps the solution could lay in the sword itself. Picture something superficially indistinguishable from the real thing made from an equivalent to nanobots which remain tight and hard against each other but immediately let go and “shatter” when struck against something else. You could bang and clash swords in fierce battle, but as soon as you would deal a severe blow against your opponent your weapon would break and deal no real damage (but still count as a win). That could be intensely satisfying and lead to great moments.

echelon

Or by being part of the brain upload simulation and unable to die.

eviks

Nah, that's pure fiction...

KaiserPro

If you want to try sword fighting there are a bunch of ways to do it.

HEMA people are generally very welcoming and probably slightly mad. quite expensive to get into, but great fun.

Fencing is more common, but start out with epee, foil is a big weird as you have right of way, its a training system and it shows, its harder to learn and not as fun. Sabre is for people who like shouting lots, more one hit wonder.

For the eastern styles:

A good Aikido class should start out with weapons, you wont be going full speed as even with wooden sticks, stuff gets dangerous pretty quick.

Korean sword work is going through somewhat of a renaissance, I don't know that much about it though.

If you're doing eastern style sword work, don't be tempted to get a metal sword, you'll never be able to train with it, and they are almost always poor quality. (unless you know what you're doing)

blktiger

I enjoy Foil _because_ of right of way, it encourages blade work, movement and technique. Without right of way Epee is quite boring to watch because the fencers spend so much time trying to figure out how to hit their opponent without being hit themselves, but the lack of rules makes it easy to learn. Saber kind of has the opposite problem in that it's so fast it's hard to watch and there is very little extended blade work. To each their own though.

some_random

Foil is definitely a better game to play, the problem is fencers (usually those starting from Epee) who are thinking of it as a duel.

yial

I would disagree about starting with epee.

But that may be a bias about form.

I fenced 4-5 times a week for about 10 years, even teaching and was at one point ranked.

Our policy was to start people on foil with a strong focus on form for usually about a year before moving to Sabre or epee.

Of course, we also usually started people with a French grip, and wrist up vs sideways.

One goal for example would be in lunge practice to have a penny or dime a few inches in front of your shoe, and have that go flying without your shoe hitting the floor.

I agree with you though that epee is the most fun, and also the most realistic.

The right of way in foil is not realistic. Furthermore, I always disliked Sabre as it is very showy but not nearly as enjoyable.

In short, foil to learn initial form and practice, and then move to epee. (I realize the arm position difference can create a challenge for some there )

“Foil is art, Sabre is theater, epee is truth”.

blackguardx

In Epee, if you poke someone in the toe, it "kills" them. Not sure it is any more realistic than foil.

some_random

It's a duel to first blood.

pseudolus

"One of Farley Chevrier’s go-to books is a 1736 treatise by Pierre Jacques François Girard, a former French navy officer, which includes twelve essential tips on how to save one’s life. The book is part of seventy documents that were digitized and shared online by the French HEMA federation".

Link to a scan of 1736 treatise: https://www.ffamhe.fr/collectionpalas/nouveau-traite-girard.... (even if you don't read French, the text includes numerous diagrams)

Link to a directory listing the various texts digitized by the French HEMA federation: https://www.ffamhe.fr/collection_palas/ (clicking on any of the links will take you to a page with more detail. To download the document click on the link beside the text that says "Pour télécharger la numérisation, cliquez sur ce lien").

bilsbie

I remember reading that swords were more the weapon of choice for portability but spears were more effective in a fight?

some_random

There are a whole lot of different types of swords, but in general spears and polearms are more effective combat tools. I like to use the modern analogy of pistols and rifles, rifles are objectively superior combat arms in pretty much every way but anyone who can get away with not carrying one carries a handgun instead.

krapp

Yes. All else being equal, reach and leverage win every time. Even the samurai considered their swords to be secondary to spears and bows, and preferred to fight on horseback rather than in the trenches (because they weren't stupid,) and then picked up guns as soon as they were viable.

null

[deleted]

failrate

I recommend @robinswords on YouTube for historical fencing.