I only have two points to add. Firstly, the off hand as counterbalance is not only done with smallswords, Capo Ferro does it constantly and you sometimes even see it done with a rotella in off hand in Bolognese tradition. And as for teapot vs raised offhand, teapot is definitely superior if you have to hold your stance for a long time for whatever reason (actual fight, or maybe just standing on a field until you're given the go ahead). Raised arms tend to get tired. Additional, albeit very minor, benefit is that if you are holding a revolver in that hand, teapot has it pointing downwards unless you decide to shoot, which may be pretty important in a confused melee. I don't think that was the historical reason, though, trigger discipline being what it was.
.....Wouldn't your stance be the opposite though with a revolver? The sword should be it the teapot spot and the revolver in the extended position so your can aim, fire and handle recoil better.
Something I noticed on one of Angelo's 1799 posters was that a lot of the combatants were carrying what looked like carbines or rifles in their off hand. I thought that was interesting because I haven't seen people mention it. Makes sense that a dismounted light cavalryman would need to keep their firearm safe and handy, but also out of the way.
They are indeed. The posters represent the practice of the London & Westminster Light Horse Volunteers. Specifically the mounted infantry element they had, which were transported in carts and equipped with rifle carbines made specially for them by Henry Nock, and the swords they all carried were in fact very long sword bayonets, which is what they are using in the posters. The left hand would indeed keep the carbine under control. Other artwork in the Angelo 1799 series shows sabres then being used with no carbine and hand on hip, and others with the scabbard held in the left hand.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing That's some really interesting context, thanks for sharing. I'd never seen this use for the off hand before, how would it affect fencing?
Not a huge amount, depending on how you fence. If you use a very stable flat footed style of footwork and short lunge as was taught at the time it has ltitle effect. Much like wearing sword belts and scabbards, it actually forces stricter form, which could be seen in the video of me fighting Alex Timmerman with cutlasses at Fightcamp. The combinaiton of sword belts/scabbards and soft ground is quite noticeable combat to training light in a sports hall.
I found that even if I leave my hand down and off to the side, it still gets hit. I was just trying some different positions to see if it would work or help in anyway. The only thing it did was kept getting my fingers hit. Glad it was just synthetic sabers. I was not wearing a glove on my off hand. Keeping it on the hip or behind your head has been the safest spot I found.
You REALLY want to know where your off hand is in a saber bout. I was saber sparring with someone at our club when I, accustomed to using my left hand to ward off rapier thrusts, (stupidly) raised my left hand to my chest. It wasn't a thrust that I absorbed using my lightly-gloved off hand, and my fingers felt...odd in the glove. I took the glove off and from it dropped the shattered remains of my tungsten wedding band. Shattered, as it had fully taken the blow that would have done the same to my fingers. These days I wear my heavy glove for longsword on my off hand and hold fast to my belt so that it no longer attempts to stray into harm's way.
I do 90% British Military Sabre with around 10% of Silver's backsword. Having been practicing backsword for a while I sparred with a friend in sabre and for the first time, I 'left my offhand' behind when I was recovering which promptly got clobbered by a hard cut. I think it was more the surprise that hurt as being generally a sabreur that hand never gets hit. I learned my lesson to be very careful when switching between side-on to more chest-on styles.
When drawing a handgun from a holster, it's common practice to keep your other hand on your chest, where it'll stay until you're ready to extend into a two handed isosceles stance, or you'll keep it there if firing one-handed. This is done to ensure that hand remains clear of the muzzle because it is quite easy to accidentally shoot yourself with such a short-barreled weapon. Before watching I speculated that with a sword it was much the same - that other hand isn't going to do anything in the fight, so might as well keep it safely away. The more things change, the more they stay the same!
Love your content, always been fascinated by rapier and sabers specifically. Some constructive criticism though; perhaps make your videos a bit shorter and structured, and work on getting your point across. What makes me say this in this video specifically is that I'm 1:50m in the video and you've basically only said that having your hand on your hip is not for showmanship. I got the same feeling on your fight analysis video as well, extremely interesting but it's easy to lose focus when the point you're making is drawn out much longer than it needs to be. Thanks for your videos though, you've a subscriber in me. Cheers.
Great video! I just wanted to say, I love that you have pages from manuals on the wall behind you. It really helps to quite literally illustrate the points you bring up, especially the point about pinning the scabbard (top, fourth from the left).
Nice vid! Even if the sources often show the left hand in the back, it's really a dangerous position that everyone should avoid at all costs. It doesn't happen often in HEMA because we don't train in nature, LARP fighters are more concerned. If you fall down with your arm in your back, you can't remove it before getting on the floor and you can break it or your shoulder quite easily.
With broadsword, sabre and Smallsword that's not too much of a risk. The lunge and recovery footwork makes grappling much more difficult, as well as it falling out of favour in a lot of European fencing styles at the time.
It's very much a preference of the author or style I would say. In the 18th century for broadsword etc the hand was use both up like in smallsword, and on the hip to keep it safe. As time goes on the hand on hip becomes more common, and then all the way behind the back gradually becomes popular two. I think they are merely means to achieve the same thing. I think tucking the hand behind the back is a more fool proof way of avoiding people liftingt the offhand up, but personally I prefer the hand on hip because I find hand behind back can put pressure on the left shoulder and also reduce traverse speed and time in some actions.
for whatever reason this posture aggravates an illusive injury, in my off hand's knuckles, that i have no recollection of acquiring. Why might this be?
It's hard to say really without knowing how the injury is done. All I can suggest is to try the different versions of it, you will probably find the closed fist on hip version most comfortable.
I've seen the odd obscure account where it happened, but based on the evidence it would be exactly that, very unusual. For the most part thye'd not be suitable for it (seeing as most infantry scabbards were leather and floppy) and more a hindrance to the style of swordsmanship.
Does the hand ever migrate forward when using a sabre against a bayonet? I'd have to imagine using a hand to parry a bayonet thrust would be difficult, but do the manuals teach it at all?
No they don't, the hand is always kept on the side or back until the parry has been made, and then the hand comes forward to grasp the musket/rifle. The same method taken to grappling with the much older messer for example. The problem with bringing the hand forward in guard is it is more easily decieved than the sword with feints, and it also squares up your body, presenting a big target and making the job harder for the sword. It is done with rapier at times, though that's in a situation where the leverage of the opponents weapon is less, being in one hand, and when fighting at roughly similar distance with your opponent.
Interesting video it was something I've always found weird, but now I have another question, why not use that hand for something useful? Like holding I knife or even the scabbard to parry or just to bother the opponent, isn't it better than nothing?
In my somewhat limited sparring experience I've found that if the item in the left hand doesn't have some kind of guard or protection (like an alehouse dagger for example) it is still very likely to be hit. But if you're using something like a targe, buckler or any dagger with a basket hilt then absolutely, push your left hand forward
There are all sorts of reasons for this, but one of the most important is the fact that a soldier has to carry all kit on campaign, and an offhand weapon is a major hassle, especially as something substantial enough to go against heavy sabres and bayonets would have to be quite large and sturdy. From a military training and discipline perspective it is also a lot easier to train people to use a single sword. An open offhand is also much more useful when using sword against bayonet also, which is about the most common thing a swordsman might have to face in that period. A scabbard or similar is more a distraction to the user in most instances and its lack of hand protection is also a major problem. The single sword does also have some advantages in its reach in the lunge and also the narrow position of defence used with such a lead shoulder forward. Offhand weaposn can be really great, but they are not without issues when you take the whole picture into account.
Waite has the hand up, but then dropped on the lunge and popping back up on the recover. As far as I can tell it does help a little, I've wondered it it wasn't recommended more broadly because it's yet another thing for a disinterested officer to learn, or if it's because you can't both control your scabbard and wag your arm around like that. Are there any pictures showing someone holding their scabbard with their offhand raised, or is that only ever shown with the hand on the hip?
Waite remains on the hip in guard and lunge as is the general trend with a lot of manuals of the mid-late 19thc. In Roworth and early Angelo works the hand is on hip or raised and then cast back in the lunge, except in the case of where a carbine is slung. The great thing about throwing the hand is it tends to bring the shoudlers in line and give good reach. I've never seen anything held in a raised offhand no, at least not in the sabre era. The scabbard tends to be held at the hip or thrown back if it is in loose mounts as shown in Angelo (1799)
What is your opinion about resting your left hand directly on the chest ? I really like close contact grappling so i don't usually rest my left hand on hip, keep it right on my chest really helps me when i got in the right distance. I also still able to keep my hand safe from being a target for my opponent's and and my own sword
It can absolutely work, I merely prefer to stick to what the sources teach for whatever weapon and period I am working from where possible. Some singlestick sources did do something similar by binding the offhand to the chest, though for different reasons. It's also not so well positioned to throw back on the lunge which gets the shoulders in line and good reach.
In Leküchner's messer. He states hand on the back or hand on the chest prepared for grappling. No closed fist on the hip which actually look a bit silly.
Pretty much all styles look a bit silly to those who don't know them. Ultimately it doesn't matter what people think looks silly ot not, but what works. You can find hand on hip with both open and closed hand in all sorts of styles, inc in German manuals such as Paulus Hector Mair and Meyer. The hand behind back doesn't work so well for sabre due to all the lunges as discussed in this video.
if my life was on the line I would have something throwable and heavy in my off hand to throw into the face of my opponent , or a secondary weapon to parry with or use should my main weapon be unavailable temporarily ( D guarded dagger or pistol come to mind along with a rock or club )
A great many people, a lot of things that are seemingly obvious to one person would not even occur to another, it's all about the information and knowledge you have.
No such thing as far as the military sabre manuals go. It was a disciplined structure where all were required to use the sword right handed. Today we can sue the term offhand to be more universal, but that would only cause more confusion in a video title.
@@f-man3274 There was a lot of discrimination against left-handed people. It wouldn't have been acceptable to fight left-handed if your right hand worked.
@Nimrod the Wise you might not see offhand as confusing because you are familiar with the term. A great many are not. When I make these videos I have to assume a great many watching are not familiar with such terminology, as is often the case. And also this was a military fighting discipline, it was taught right handed to all. Left handers know well enough how to mirror.
