Emerald is a historical martial arts practitioner based in Sydney, Australia. They have spent many years studying historical European martial arts, with their main focus being on the works of Alfred Hutton (which was the topic of their honours thesis) and other 19th Century British fencing masters, along with Viking Age fighting methods and classical unarmed arts.
In addition to their martial arts background Emerald is a trained historian and has conducted lecture series on a variety of periods, their main focuses being modern and medieval history.
I have been studying Hutton more since last posting here. I just wanted to say your videos do Hutton alot of credit ,I had followed the anti-Hutton band wagon for a bit but after chatting with you a bit on discord and following your youtube channel my opinion changed entirely.
I have several videos about player agency on my channel as well. It's an absolutely critical topic to understand if you wish to understand not just game design, but also running games.
As simple as it is, this video helped me in the most. From that position it just felt natural to take the moves further. As long as u remember your footing
European militaries still largely used cutting swords. The smallsword was not typically a military weapon carried to battle except by some officers. Swords that cut largely dominated European military sword use.
I very much enjoyed your video. The high octave parry is a very useful technique to learn. And as is a lot of sabre parries, tends to get viewed as a static positional thing. I can certainly understand thit as you are viewing a drawing of a fencer holding the parry in one position. The reality is that that is a snapshot of the parry that is transitioning from the starting guard, to the parry and then to the reposte (with or without feints). It's all pretty much one continuous flow. One of Hutton's teachings we don't use that often though is the medium guard (though it does have it's specific uses on occasion).
I really enjoyed the video. My second manual I got my hands on was Cold Steel. Despite the first one being a long sword manual that was more interpretation of old works instead of a translation, I found Cold Steel much easier to read. Unfortunately at the time I was studying accounting and rarely got around to practicing, it was only a year or so ago that I joined a hema club. They discouraged me from using Cold Steel so I went more for meyer's dussack and the club tought Hungarian sabre. But I have a desire to use Cold Steel and you have inspired me to look more into it. Also I must admit I did watch the video you are replying to but stopped halfway through as I was hoping for something more like what you did than they did, as I felt there was little referenced and more of a trust me I know what I'm talking about (I have low opinion of videos that give me that feel, I Iike my references) but maybe it is just that one video of theirs and their others are better
I would simply refer you to Leckuchner as a higher authority who depending on the force of the attack describes voiding (eg lemstück, nachreisen) , binding the blade (hidden strokes, absetzen) and combinations of the two (überlauffen,entrüsthau)
I don't care for Cold Steel but I like Huttons other work especially the Swordsman and Fixed Bayonets. I don't think Hutton knew Parise's method very well , CS really felt like a Hodge podge effort of British sabre and a poor interpretation of Parise. Too each thier own though.
I don't disagree that Cold Steel is Hutton going full sword nerd, but I think that has its place. I think the big problem with Cold Steel is that it was intended as an advanced manual that was meant to give fencers a lot of different options, but since it's so readily available a lot of people try to start sabre with it without having done foil first (as Hutton suggests). I've honestly found the mix of Victorian sabre and 18th century backsword really useful recently since I find switching guards is a really great way to prompt me to switch game plans when fencing. But you're right that it's really horses for courses when it comes to manuals. Like I think the problem with Cold Steel is that it's often used outside of the context it was intended for.
I feel like Hutton wanted to capitalize on the popularity of Italian sabre methods. They were in vogue and he was trying to grow the fencing scene in England.
There's definitely a bit of that, like Hutton really is trying to sell his stuff. But at the same time he really is trying to be comprehensive in what he describes. Like he wants a manual that tells the reader about as much as possible which seems to be one of the things that was valued about it in the period.
What the sidestep ACTUALLY does is allow you not to stupidly skewer YOURSELF in the conveniently-pointed-at-you opponent's point - at least, make HIM do the work of skewering you instead.
the tool is only as effect as the user. Also you describe useing the gun sword in a manner that isnt ideal for the weapon as if it was one weapon and not two For example,your stance with a gun sword wouldnt be that of a sword or gun but a mix of the two. Why esle have a 2 n 1 weapon if your stance is only prepared for 1 of them... I mean as far as a mid to close range weapon a gun sword is golden... Handling the weapon properly is all that is required and i dont think midevil sword styles cover its capabilities. Similar to a ballistic knife combat only you keep your weapon. So i don't see this weapon as flawed, it was only limited by the capability of the era .
All the guy with the larger shield needs to do is shove his shield's rim into the the sword arm's shoulder of the other guy, therefore the axe becomes useless and the smaller shield becomes a disadvantage. You can simply hack at his shoulder, ribs, belly, thigh, etc. Never lost a reenactment duel that way if the guy has a smaller shield, that and I have long arms xD I think Thegnthrand had a move like that in his Axe & Shield videos.
True...but i think. Between a bayonet vs a sword. The sword has more offensive potential. I mean a bayonet is a short spear with at most a 9 inch blade while a sword is well 20 to 33 inches of cutting edge... Though i do beleive both are better than a gun without bullets which is why a combo weapon like a gunsword is so appealing.
For better or worse I'm based in Syndey's inner west, but I do have online courses you can do from anywhere. You can check them out at www.theoldswordclub.com/courses/
Nice Video! I have a video with some additional ideas about fighting with an axe and shield... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-skQbmOQcGo4.html
Has the spear guy thought about switching the hands he uses? If he mirrored the sword user and held his spear a bit further down the shaft then I think it might be easier to get around the shield.
For left-handed fencer would the numbered cuts/parries be reversed? Or do they stay the same on either side (cut number 1 always hits opponent on left side of the head) for ease of communication?
I've never got a satisfactory period answer to that question. Really it depends if the fencer learns better by copying the instructor or by tracing cutting diagrams with their sword. When I teach I usually just ask left handed students what works better for them.
Tim Is Green I asked Matt Easton and he said that they are reversed. I like that better as it makes more sense to my brain than keeping the zones consistent.
I'm glad you found something that works for you. I'm of the mind that training should be modified to suit the student's growth and development where possible.
This is what I learned in a historical saber seminar when I was learning Olympic style saber back in the early 1990s. They would have guess instructors teach historical, theatrical, and related disciplines in seminar. It wasn't until the early 2000s that I learned Kali 5 count & 12 count from Dan Inosanto at a JKD seminar then later Sayoc at another seminar.
The numbering system for parades (parries) which you describe does appear in Henry Angelo's Infantry Sword Exercise (1845) but in Cold Steel and The Swordsman, Hutton uses prime, seconde, tierce, quarte, quinte, sixte, septime and octave. These do not correspond to the numbers of the cuts which they defend. The 1845 manual used a new numbering system because the military feared that the troops would be 'confused' by salle French. I think you ought to have mentioned this, for completeness.
I feel like this is something I'll save when I do a history of which sword systems were used in which bits of the 19th century. But thanks for the suggestion.
Hi Tim. Ive been interested in light cavalry (hussar, light dragoon etc.) sabres that were used by infantry (especially skirmishers and flanking units). Examples being the polish sabre and the mighty 1796 pattern British light cav sabre. Do you think this kind of sabre fighting will make it onto the Sydney scene, or is that too niche? I just love those flowing ripostes and insane cutting power :)
I and someone else in my club (we're club einherjar in sydney) we recently decided to try spear and shield for the first time in reenactment fightingand interestingly in a 1v1 without the ability to at least target the lower leg, unless someone gets really lucky it is impossible for either side to remain victorious and the fight just ends in a standstill so long as either side is remotely competant with their shield due to the fact typical shields cover plenty of the body and we find we couldnt do the fine pointwork you can do with a 2 handed spear to exploit small gaps. this changes in a group fight however as the spears ability to attack targets obliquely and also being at risk of swords means those impasses dont usually occur.
When I did spear and shield at the Macquarie Uni Dark Ages society we found pretty much the same thing. Once you eliminate the face and lower leg most of the spear's offensive ability is lost and it becomes ineffective against swords or axes in one on one combat. I've heard that some of AAF people made one on one reenactment spear and shield work by being really good with their shield, but when you're relying on shield work that much the weapon doesn't matter. When you do it with fencing masks and shin guards to allow a full range of targets the game changes dramatically. Spear and shield becomes really effective against other weapon combinations fighting one on one and start to get a sense of how the weapon combo would have been used. You should try it. A few years ago at Armidale myself and Pete got enough people together to do a shield wall with full face protection and full targets. It was very different to the melees I'd done I re-enactment combat before, but more importantly it was a lot of fun. Lines collapsed really quickly and you could attack the person in front of you much more easily. I suspect that had we done more of it the tactics we used would have changed drastically.
that said against any shieldless combo its frighteningly powerful, i.e against 2 handed swords, polearms, 2 handed spears, 2 handed axes. etc. due to the shields ability to cover yourself but still having more reach than a sword
Hi Tim Is Green. I've been watching a few Schola Gladiatoria videos on English Sabre lately, and I wonder if anyone is instructing in the discipline. I'm in Wollongong and work in Sydney, and I've noticed that the Stoccata School of Defence offers Italian Fencing, which includes an element of Italian Duelling Sabre under Provost Richard Cullinan. I've contacted him about Italian Duelling sabre, and am keen to do some lessons in the discipline, but I'd ultimately like to progress to British military sabre. Do you have any suggestions about doing this? (For example, if there are no British sabre teachers in Sydney, is it better to start with English Backsword as a foundation for Hutton style military sabre?)
I'm going to start proper classes somewhere in Sydney's inner west next year through Stoccata. Also if you're in the Sydney area you're more than welcome to hit me up for a private lesson by emailing me at black.tim.green@gmail.com. Otherwise if you want to do something to progress towards late 19th century British sabre you'll find it's a lot more similar to earlier British backsword than it is to Italian sabre and the techniques easier to adapt.
OK, that's great. I'm definitely interested in attending the group class in 2018. If you ever offer a course in Bayonet Fencing, I'd be interested in taking that too. With the anniversary of the Battle of Beersheba coming up, I think it'd be neat to do some Light Horse inspired training. Apparently the 4th Australian Light Horse Brigade did a bayonet charge on horseback, then dismounted and fought on foot. Given their iconic status in our military history, I've thought it might be an interesting way to inspire interest in historical fencing from the era of sabre and bayonet.
Something which I feel is overlooked a bit in HEMA is that most fights don't last more than a few passes. Fencing for longer provides more "data" (and is obviously fun) but it's worth noting if one weapon consistently seems to win the first few passes. Sometimes one fencer initially has the advantage but then the other works out a way to reliably defeat it and starts winning. That's all well and good but in a real fight he may not have had the chance to do that. e.g. This is all second-hand but I've noticed that quite often newer people especially fighting against rapiers will just get stabbed initially because they don't fully appreciate how long it is. They may correct that very quickly but if it were a duel that could well have been the end.
Overarm (or under-hand referred to here), is actually very functional in a duel as well. There's a good Schola HEMA sparring video showing it. It's as you say, it is much stronger defensively, and it's better up close, you can gig it out, throw it, it's good in a group, etc. Now we can see though, with Thrand's recent videos regarding the sliding technique.. it's pretty decent at range as well. At least for some sneak long shots. Also neat that you and I came up with the same exact grip-changing method. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NVOw4tUvewI.html (:
It's a historically accurate replica. The website say's it's only 2lbs (which is average). But it feels extremely heavy compared to swords with the exact same weight. www.kultofathena.com/product.asp?item=USS176A&name=British+Cutlass+%2D+24%27%27+Blade
That's probably a bit heavier than it should be but it's not too bad. The point of balance is quite high though, when you say it feels heavy is that from swinging it around?
Looks like it's because the sword barely changes thickness from the base of the guard to the tip. You will probably find that your other swords are quite a lot thinner at the tip then the base.
