[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]

/hobby/ - Hobby

"Our hands pass down the skills of the last generation to the next"
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

 No.3859[Last 50 Posts]

:Broadsword Edition:

>What is HEMA or WMA?

Historical European Martial Arts or sometimes Western Martial Arts are attempts at decoding, studying, and practicing the history, art, and fighting of everything from the Medieval Period to Early Modern Combatives.

What traditions are you lot studying at the moment?

Me? Going through George Silver's "Paradoxes of Defence" to expand my regimental broadsword/sabre repertoire.


Just posting a few more for interest.


And this one, if you can read it.


File: 1608525773356.jpg (1.5 MB, 2000x2909, test reformat.jpg)

And last one. You should have enough to get practicing with these four.
>attempt to upload #4


I can't believe somebody finally made a HEMA thread. Thank you, anon!

So yeah, the official British military system formulated by the Angelo family/school (also other related sources like the instructional posters and books for personal purchase by one of their students such as Roworth) is relatively easy to learn, since it was designed to teach an army but also because it and other 18th-19th century fencing such as smallsword are what modern sport fencing descended from. The reduction/simplification of theory and focus on descriptions, instructions and drilling doesn't make it any less effective than medieval or renaissance fencing. Rather, the "theory" becomes apparent in its practise. It's quite /fa/ too.

Nick Thomas' channel for various sparring videos and a few instructional videos since the quarantine to get a feel for the system:
He works mostly with Roworth's Art Of Defense On Foot from 1796 which is clearly based on Angelo's method and also OP's posters. There is also the official "Infantry Sword Excerise" manual (again, Angelo-based) which was first published in 1817. I'll try to upload them in the next post.

Also, Jay Mass, who focuses on basket hilt broadsword methods has also been providing lessons and drills on the military-style system since the quarantine. Check him out here:


Pretty dang cool, I'll check'em out.

A source I've worked with, that I think is a great into in addition to Angelo's Ten Lesson format, is Archibald Maclaren who streamlined the RN's cutlass and later it'd go on to become the infantry standard in 1875. it's just four cuts with four guards, but it's pretty dope.

Another cool source for fun is from Australia (see attached). Basically Italian dueling sabre.


Here they are. The 1824 edition of Charles Roworth's Art Of Defense On Foot along with the 1817 and 1845 editions of Infantry Sword Exercise (too large; next post). These first two are by Nick's AHF group. I'm including the second Infantry Sword Exercise because I think the layout is easier to read and later editions of these books tend to be "better". The intro also expands a bit on the Angelo line. All three pdfs start with background info on the book, the system and the Angelos.

Honestly, if you're interested in regimental fencing, I think it's better to start by watching introductory or instructional videos and observing sparring with instructors. Once you get a feel for it, you can start reading Roworth. Consult the internet for more information. I don't really recommend starting with ISE because it is more of a drilling instruction with stretches and warm-up exercises at the beginning. Of course, all this is only if you have no nearby clubs to join or if your club does not practise it.


Awesome, I'll give them a read once I'm done with Silver.

Sometimes I imagine training a group of comrades in this kind of stuff for fun and "just in case", but then realise guns are a thing :\


1845 edition of Infantry Sword Exercise.

>George Silver
Been reading him too. His "Brief Instructions Upon My PoD" is an actual fencing how-to while PoD is more his "thesis" on the italians. The important parts are chapters which *might* explain his personal fencing theory and concepts though they sometimes require reading between the lines. His takes on the rapier the last thing pay attention to, imo. And I am no fan of the long Capo Ferro style rapiers.

>to expand my regimental broadsword/sabre repertoire.

Are you reading the PoD & BI compilation by Cyril G. R. Matthey? The context of Matthey's editing and publishing it in 1898 with the help of "early HEMA"ist Alfred Hutton is exactly that. They felt that contemporary military swordsmanship lacked certain essential things such as grappling and hopes the reader to learn them as presented by George Silver.


I do love how with Swetnam, Wylde, what'shisname, and Silver, it completes what we pretty much know about early English (and by reeeeaaaally long stretch Scottish) baskethilt fencing and rapier.

Paradoxically, Silver basically teaches you really simple "rapier" if you read it from the other perspective.

Throw in some Saviolo and Di Grassi, plus that other dude, maybe Pallas Amarta, and we see that the "English" rapier was a fucking chimera of a system.

I'm reading the BOB, Big Orange Book. It's actual name, "Masters of Defence" by Paul Wagner and I got if for cheap. Plus years ago at a festival I got some lessons from Stephen Hand and said Paul Wagner when they visited my country.
But yes, the later the sabre, the less gritty it is, the more one has to reintroduce more stuff. early broadsword, or "clan Era" stuff has a lot of that kind of thing.


File: 1608525775328.png (82.8 KB, 452x686, Cutlass.png)

>See >>3880
Basically this image is the earlier version of the 1875 Maclaren Ed. manual.


File: 1608525777368-0.png (124.27 KB, 246x209, Vincentio_Saviolo.png)

File: 1608525777368-1.jpg (829.28 KB, 946x1340, Di_Grassi_Portrait.jpg)

>Paradoxically, Silver basically teaches you really simple "rapier" if you read it from the other perspective.
At a certain point, all bladework becomes familiar. I remember an article describing simple rapier using Liechtenauer. The four hangings as the main four positions, durchwechseln as the cavazione, etc. .

I think the differences that remain are what makes each tradition/system/master their own. Their ideal dimensions of a weapon, their preferred mode of conduct or "body language" and even the way information is structured and relayed are things that give shape to a "system".

>Saviolo and Di Grassi

Really like these two for late sidesword/early rapier. They complement each other well despite some differences. Di Grassi in particular is fascinatingly simple but in such a fashion that his dimunitive plays are applicable in a broad amount of ways. Saviolo is also interesting in his preference for off-line or circular footwork. There are discussions on him possibly being influenced by spanish swordplay including a paper by Stephen Hand.

I find "simple" systems more interesting these days. If I'm ever in the mood for bolognese sidesword, it's usually Dall' Agocchie or Anonimo Bolognese since they start with sword alone and do away with the lengthy "assaults" format for shorter plays.


File: 1608525778454.jpg (88.89 KB, 477x351, fucking italians.jpg)

>I find "simple" systems more interesting these days.
Absolutely agree.
Pouring over cryptic and convoluted "trade secret" manuals just doesn't do it for me much these days. Not to say I don't enjoy them but people like fucking Marozzo, bruh, just get to the point.

Manciolino is pretty concise and clear… When he's not jerking himself of about his "Classical Literary Education".

Di Grassi I think is deceptively simple, similar to my mind as Giganti in that they (the master) expect you to experiment and practice yourself. Compare this to someone like Fabris who's not as anal as Ferro, but also specifies key points and concepts without going full Destreza tier specific.

Then again you get someone like MacBane and you're left feeling "Okay, what the FUCK did I just read?"


File: 1608525784966.jpg (415.36 KB, 950x738, Di_Grassi_21.jpg)

Nice to know Fabio is using Di Grassi and Saviolo in his recent appearances. Sucks that they're on the rare side of fencing but there are dedicated groups and videos around.

It's interesting to see Silver use the "in a real fight" card centuries ago in PoD but also funny that he directed it against people with military experience. Both Saviolo and Di Grassi seem confident in what they do. Granted, DG's greatsword is pretty out there.

Rob just uploaded this short presentation on time/tempo for Meyer's rappier but it's very similar to the topics in Silver's fencing theory. Silver's "Space" is the distance one needs to travel to successfully land a defense or attack. The four true times are as I see it can be simplified as four kinds of motions. Each motion suggests a particular speed/time and a particular measure/space. The time of the hand is fastest, but it's only possible when one is within striking distance (the "Place") since the foot does not move or at least does not need to.

A faster true time will "defeat" a slower true time which is why tarrying in the Place is a dangerous thing since both fencers will then act on the time of hand. At that point, the first mover will likely arrive first. If you are to defend an attack there, you will likely fail since your Space will be too wide. "Wide" as in your hand does not have enough time to travel to the intended spot in due time, of which time is so short since the attacker is operating in time of the hand. Moreover, the hand is swifter than the eye. One cannot expect to parry every blow, much less at such a short distance.

So leave the Place as soon as your action is finished. Maintain your distance to keep yourself safe. Parry in the closest position from your current one so they cannot deceive you in such little time. However you counter an attack that comes, couple it with a slight retreat backwards. Such are Silver's various advices on defense.


I've always wanted to get into this. Seems like a fun and semi useful way to work out. (probably not as much as something like Brazilian jiu jitsu which I also want to do but still)


>Seems like a fun and semi useful way to work out.
It is pretty sweet.
Just get a bokken/shinnai, or sledgehammer, even a stick, and go through the motions.
If you want to get sickening grip and forearm gains (and as a grappler I should hope you would), get a pair of Indian Clubs (or make some from plastic tubes and water bottles filled with… Whatever). Feel a pump and cramp you never thought possible.
>also fixed my tennis elbow and carpal tunnel but ymmv


What sort of period/weapon are you interested in? Longsword is the most popular thing by far. There's also messer and sword & buckler for the medieval period. Sideswords and rapiers can get quite technical. Regimental swordmanship of the late 18th-19th century (resources posted above) is much more simple to work with, and foil fencing began as the training for smallsword a bit before that.

Of course, you'd want a dedicated partner/group for any serious training. In any case, you can stick to one system and work from there. How to cut effectively and safely, edge alignment, body mechanics, footwork, etc. . There's plenty of videos for beginners in the net to consult and compare with.

If you're interested enough to read the sources, there's Wiktenauer. They don't have everything but they do host the major medieval (german & italian) and bolognese (sidesword) sources. Take heed though that learning to read a treatise is a whole other process.


I'm a pretty big dude, so I'm definitely leaning more towards longsword. As much as I am interested in the idea of a rapier my fine motor skills can be shit since I have a slight tremor.

I live in a major city so I definitely think I should be able to find a place to train when the corona epidemic is over.


>As much as I am interested in the idea of a rapier my fine motor skills can be shit since I have a slight tremor.

I'd recommend you still try it, I can't recall which master it was but there was one who wrote a short textual treatise who had "the shakes". However all this did was a) Lull opponents into a false sense of confidence, underestimate him in other words, an b) During salle practice and acutal shit-your-pants judicial duels said shaking stopped because
>"… All the sinews and senses of the body, in that moment of truth, were stilled like water on a pond…"

Foil has a similar effect according to a former instructor. Something to do with the body going "Oh, we need signal to word briefly and it's done so often so we'll shortcut it momentarily".


Interesting then. I might possibly consider it.


File: 1608525799455.jpg (108.74 KB, 1280x853, 1 (1).jpg)

I forgot to check what the strayans are up to. Nice to finally get a look at Paul's take on Time and within interesting situations beyond having a basket hilt alone.

>very similar to the topics in Silver's fencing theory.
>Robert has been swinging swordlike objects around for the past 18 years, first, with various medieval reconstruction groups, then in 2006 started a HEMA study group looking at the backsword/broadsword method of the Elizabethan Englishman George Silver.
Ah, makes sense. The anglos were there all along.

Baskets hilts are pretty interesting and their sources don't need translations but damn they can get expensive. With pic related which is in the 200€ range I could emulate arming sword/messer, sidesword and probably even early rapier. A sabre would be nice too…


File: 1608525800385.jpg (96.99 KB, 599x449, hawkins4.jpg)

>Baskets hilts are pretty interesting and their sources don't need translations but damn they can get expensive.

Well there are a few options!

If you look at german dussack, or Dutch walloons, they have quite simple hilts but still count as "basket hilts".
Something like your sidesword there, well put a few more side rings on it, a knuckle bow, and you've got a complex hilt!
Another option is to add plates to it to turn it into a bilbo or cup hilt.
The last, and period accurate piece of advice, is to wear a gauntlet on your sword hand.

A cool short cut also: If you learn broadsword, backsword, sabre, or any other baskethilt system, you can quickly adapt to using a buckler by using a less protective hilt and a buckler, and pretending your buckler is the baskethilt and act accordingly. It works pretty good.


File: 1608525800928-0.jpeg (118.72 KB, 1600x1003, image.jpeg)

Oh, I was more thinking of the baskets in the British Isles.


Rawlings uses blackfencer's 1796 for both sabre and dusack. I guess stirrup sabres are versatile in that way.


I was wondering what the french were using as their broadsword equivalent before everyone started using sabres. That is, what sword represented the "espadon" fencing seen in certain smallsword plates as opposed to "pointe" and "contre-pointe".

Also consider how the basic double shell + knucklebow setup from the walloon survived well into the 18th century with various blades types. The 1796 spadroon comes into mind.



All this is great, but absolutely useless if we have no-one to practise with. Practicing strokes and motions don't help unless you know when to use them in a fight instinctually, and just practicing alone will not gain you this instinct. This goes for ANY martial art.


File: 1608525810465.jpg (875.78 KB, 1909x1163, Hundt_100.jpg)


Exactly, which is why people gather and do these things together. Fencing is more fun with friends. Drills and solo practise are still useful for conditioning, building muscle and working on good form. What better to do under a lockdown?

Besides, there is an actual academic side to HEMA. Discussing theory, historical & sociopolitical context and experimentation are pretty important for HEMA as a whole. These surviving documents and source materials form the basis of all HEMA. Whether or not you're alone, you'd refer to them all the same.

There are things you just can't practise alone, like this: https://youtu.be/GjkRhHYTeyw

And heres a bunch of people having fun: https://youtu.be/bFzlrSmS-yM


Don't mind me. Just skipping past the entirety of longsword plays to get to the interesting stuff. The painted illustrations hosted at wiktenauer are nice too.


File: 1608525877816.webm (2.87 MB, 480x350, HEMA.webm)



File: 1608525884946.png (1.55 MB, 1065x897, Cod.10799_009r_detail.png)


Interesting post by cleverseneca:
>Coming from a German longsword and I.33 background, one thing that struck me in reading bolognese, is that they don't talk about binding or winds with the sword. Now obviously this isn't to say that this system doesn't or can't bind, just that they do not use language or special terms describe it directly like the Germans. The Germans are remarkably intentional about describing binds.

The concept of "fuhlen" or feeling the bind is clearly very important in Liechtenauer's approach to fencing theory. From this need comes the very useful description of the 28 windings. How one should proceed in a bind depends on if they or their opponent is "weak" or "strong", "hard" or "soft". All in all, it's a universally applicable way of understanding and describing blade actions. I think however, this focus within the text could also bring about the misconception that one must always seek the bind. Clearly not true since there are various offensive actions that rather avoid it. Even against a simple countercut or parry, if your opponent is so weak or soft that their blade gets beaten away, the best thing to do is simply to extend your point. Likewise, there is no need to resort to "advanced winding techniques" in a bind when simpler, more direct actions are possible.

>All this to say, you probably won't get a name for your movement as a binding movement. Its going to likely best be described either as a mezza volta (partial turn of the sword) [its transitioning from d'alicorno to guardia di entrance if I am imagining it correctly] , a strammazzone (a wrist cutting motion) or as disengage called a sfalazzare or cavare (which later become cavazione).

Another related observation I'd like to add is that whether in a bind or not, the various motions you'd do moves the sword in more or less the same ways to the same postitions. I believe Viggiani also states that whether you're attacking or defending, you'd move the sword in similar ways along the same lines. From Fiore to the Bolognese masters, Di Grassi to Saviolo, the lack of specific terms and general vagueness in the topic of binding or winding seems largely consistent. They usually write only of strong and weak in terms of the blade's divisions and their use in leverage, attacking and defending.

Vagueness could work in another way. Inverting this observation, it also means that one particular motion can be used in various contexts. Using dall'Agocchie as example: After parrying with guardia testa (inside hanging) you can return with a double tramazzone instead of a single mandritto. He doesn't really give any reason why but we can imagine that the first cut can serve either as a feint or a back edge parry/beat or perhaps we can cut the arm first before going for the head. Going even further, it can be understood that a particular set of blade motions can be used with different footwork and likewise a particular footwork pattern can be used with different bladework. You get the idea.


Interesting write up anon. Thanks, I'll have to give it some thought.


File: 1608525936242.png (554.11 KB, 515x432, Johannes_Liechtenauer.png)

Little late but glad you found my rambling useful! I'm not experienced by any means. Still can count times I've sparred with my hand.

As I understand it, the be-all and end-all of Liechty's system is simply to sieze the vor and work to the nearest opening with the smallest possible motion. The various techniques and devices laid out are ways to achieve that. Most of the plays actually deal with you being nach and having to retake the vor, usually using the relevant techniques indes.

A bit more to add to the second part. By understanding that the same motion, more or less, can be utilised in multiple ways (offensive or defensive, in a bind or out, etc.) one can break down (by indentifying instances of the same action, how they're used each time) or build up (by trying to apply one action in other ways) a system, whether they're "complex" or "simple". Also, another example of vagueness in text: Di Grassi clicked for me when I was watching some dall'Agocchie plays and realised how a couple or more of them would fit into just one of DG's plays which had the virtue of being vague, or rather, open-ended on the position of the sword hand. One play effectively becomes several.

Of course, we should always experiment responsibly by still adhering to a system's particulars. They are after all what shapes one master's method into their own and differently for others. The instances of bending or even breaking them without consequence does not invalidate an entire philosophy of fencing. Sometimes, simplicity is the point.

Aight, that's enough for today.


File: 1608525942800.png (76.87 KB, 250x209, Johannes_Lecküchner.png)

Shit, I completely forgot to address the original point of the second part of my post.

So, did the "Italians" in general saw no need to be as descriptive of the bind (not just the state of it, but sometimes whether you're even in one) due to an implicit understanding of this observation? That you, more or less, will do the same action whether with or without blade contact? Couple that with how they usually clarify that the foible is for attacking, the forte is for defending and maybe a bit on leverage, a reader probably has enough tools to understand what to do when blades do meet. We'll likely never know for sure. It's a useful way of looking at things whatever the case.

Moreover, I think my question being "did the Italians" is a bit misleading. The other fencing material I've read are not that different regarding binds. It is the "Germans" (Liechtenauer tradition and those related to it) that are the exception, not the rule in this case.


Yeah, the German traditions loved binding and talking about it constantly.
Seems most other countries just kinda got on with it.


>Fencing is more fun with friends. Drills and solo practise are still useful for conditioning, building muscle and working on good form. What better to do under a lockdown?



File: 1608525963174-1.jpg (337.87 KB, 922x692, image3.jpg)

Pigs had some pretty nice swords tbh.

Wasn't it by William Tuohy? I checked a bit and an Archibald Maclaren was apparently influential for his physical education system and did write a book on (foil) fencing but not an official one.



File: 1608525974518.jpg (345.81 KB, 1600x1082, talhoffer_hat_throw.jpg)

Reposting a series of effort posts on rapiers, spears, longswords and distance

Saw this cool video of a rapier vs a longsword. It looks like the rapier was a better weapon. So much more range and speed. https://youtu.be/6r7VWIQCHvM

Range is a huge advantage in a fight. Fighting a spear is tough if you only have a sword. You will be in the danger zone before they do. They will be able to make feints and thrusts before your sword is even able to hurt them. Covering yourself and getting past their point is key to survival.
It is important though to realize that the spearman can still shorten the spear or use the back end. Therefore to disable/hamper the usage of the spear after getting past the point is equally important, whether by binding and angling the spear away with your blade, gripping the shaft or even simply rushing in to whack/grapple 'em before they could retreat or pull back their point. Likely you'd do more than one those at the same time.
>better weapon
I wouldn't go that far. The user's proficiency is more relevant. In any case, "better weapon" requires context. Range? Against armour? Single combat or multiple opponents? Battlefield or everyday carry? The last one especially is important to consider when discussing weapons. It's why people carried bucklers rather than shields, swords rather than spears, staves or walking sticks rather than edged polearms. Both rapiers and longswords were certainly carried in battlefields though.
A rapier would typically be nimbler than a longsword, thanks to its point of balance being at the guard/handle. I think "speed" is too vague a word. A sword is only as fast as the hand that moves it. A longsword is held with both. Its movements can be more powerful and just as fast with good body mechanics. Moreover, the longsword would have more leverage in a crossing/bind thanks to its greater mass, mass distribution and being held in two hands. However, you can see how rapidly the rapier changes lines and angles to both parry and strike.
Nick's group mostly does late 18th-19th century british military swordsmanship (sabre, basket-hilt sword, cutlass, spadroon, etc.). These are also interesting:
&ltInb4 'Rapiers are almost useless against fully armoured opponents'
Most opponents do not have full plate armor with chainmail underarmor anything less will still have vulnerable zones easy for a lighter rapier user to exploit. Even then, a rapier has the precision to strike through something like a visor hole.


File: 1608525974755.jpg (11.3 KB, 480x360, 1447718583317.jpg)

Repost 2
Rob Roy and The Duellists have 2 of the best swordfights put onscreen in Western ekranization


>HEMA instructor
>17 minutes
I gotta agree on that first one. Only thing I've seen of the witcher but Geralt moves really well despite the reverse grip.

Really like this one too. Like Dave said, "spinning" becomes an actual thing against multiple opponents. That said, most of the twirling came from the guards when they're closing in or retreating. There's grappling, punching, kicking, enhanced spatial awareness (loljedi) along with solid blows and parries.

The highlight is definitely on Ben dealing with multiple guards. Gripping and using one's weapon to defend himself while parrying and striking at the other two. There's just something about his saber and how he handles it that I find appealing. The way he keeps his point on line @ 1:27 is sexy.


I don't get it when people say "real sword fighting wouldn't look good". I don't think anyone's advocating for 100% realism. I'm sure boxing in movies and IRL look different too. Perhaps it's different for the uninformed, but historical swordplay looks better every way. Hell, some exchanges in sparring can be as theatrical as cinema all while being technically sound.

Since exaggerating or slowing bladework even with good technique for safety and the viewers' benefit is already a given, the next best aim would be to give "masters" or "experts" good and distinct forms when moving and fighting. Body language is part of acting, no?

Have a gander at Robert and his opponents:

And if you want fancy shit, the masters have it too: https://youtu.be/0dnGNJvoNeQ
Or you can be fancy in a sensible way:

Hollywood is actually not interested in History, but only a semblance of Historical accurary hence why there are so many inaccuracies in films. They just don't care.


File: 1608525974874-0.jpg (171.55 KB, 1200x844, sword combat 1.jpg)

File: 1608525974874-1.jpg (160.64 KB, 1200x844, sword combat 2.jpg)

File: 1608525974874-2.jpg (99.22 KB, 800x563, sword combat 3.jpg)

Some contributions


File: 1608525975063-0.jpg (120.05 KB, 1200x843, small shield fencing 2.jpg)

File: 1608525975063-1.jpg (128.42 KB, 1200x843, small shield fencing.jpg)


File: 1608525984075.jpg (155.44 KB, 1200x844, D5TQ6NFU8AA9pSu.jpg)

There's a fourth book on shields.

Thanks anon.


How would you rate the swashbuckling in Pirates of the Caribbean (first film). I felt that while a bit theatrical, it did so relatively realistically.



Series of videos on George Silver.
>keep it simple
>keep your distance
>defensive inches vs. offensive feet
>step back in whichever of the 3 actions (counterattack, ward & return or slip & return) you choose to do when set upon
While one might not agree with his definition of true times, I think it's a good introductory work that condenses and puts Silver's system into perspective.

In particular, him admitting that, yes, being on the defensive and generally keeping distance will have you missing on certain opportunities for offense which brings up an interesting point. Maintaining distance for an extended period even in something quasi-competitive like sparring might not be the most productive action. In a "real fight" however, if you are out of distance and your attacker dares not to close, you are definitely keeping yourself unharmed. Silver himself described the epitome of the art as two fencers who are unable to hurt one another.

He also explained Silver's "four motions" (bent, spent, lying spent and going back) and "four actions" (first, before, just and afterwards) which are some of the less discussed terms that were mentioned in PoD but seemingly absent in BI.


Thanks for the 4th book and you're welcome.


File: 1608526045237-0.jpg (92.32 KB, 1280x720, Urumi.jpg)

File: 1608526045237-1.jpeg (81.55 KB, 512x592, snakesword.jpeg)


Reposting an interesting anecdote

Robert Venus 1 year ago
"I first heard of the Urumi from a Sikh guy at a gym in Coventry, England. When he described it I was highly sceptical about its actual efficiency. He described it as a ceremonial weapon (where we all know that ridiculous is perfectly fine) and as a last resort. It was the latter that intrigued me. He brought his Urumi (no edge) to the gym and attached it to his belt. We heavy sparred with training knives 6 v 1. When we got close he unclipped the Urumi and let loose. We all had full guards on but the effectiveness of it, to displace or fend off a number of attackers was good. The speed he went from knife to a spinning wall of 5 spring steel ribbons was around 1 second. He then returned to knife for a single, controlled attack. And repeat. It'd be easily overcome with basic armour but that wasn't the context of its use. I also attempted to use it and was far more grateful of armour than when I was on the other end of it!"

TL;DR: Whipsword
Pro: It's unpredictable. Your opponent can't easily defend against it.
Con: It's unpredictable. You can't easily defend against it.

It also reminds me of the snakesword from Inuyasha


Recognising good effort posts.

she protec
she attac
but most of all
she want a hema anime bacc

Other George Silver channel (a bit cringe and low quality but has been active as a club for 20 years): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrDy16tSbklzWkqaunMGdzw

And Georgie's books:

Paradoxes of Defence (the theory book but with some good hints): https://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Paradoxes_of_Defence_(George_Silver)

Brief Instructions on Paradoxes of Defence (the actual fighting manual bit): https://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Bref_Instructions_vp%C3%B5_My_Pradoxes_of_Defence_(Sloane_MS_No.376)

[b]tl;dr[/b] and cbf reading and watching hours of content? Here's the entire system in less than five minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT3oaQl_fwg
It's a bit dated now, but still a good primer.

Similar to some flails or other styles of that sort of weapon from different cultures. It has a very specific purpose, but at that purpose it's dope if you have sufficent training/skill in it and understand its weaknesses and strengths.


I paid more attention to the swords they were using tbh so I had to rewatch a couple of scenes. Some of the swords look like copies of the various hangers used in the first half of the 18th century. A couple showed up in James Miller's 1735 micro-treatise labelled as "faulchion". Here's Matt Easton with one them: https://youtu.be/-Km5tWrhU-4

>I felt that while a bit theatrical, it did so relatively realistically.

I'd say so. There's nothing truly "offensive" about it. In Will's first encounter with Jack, you can see the sword he used was some sort of single edged spadroon after it got stuck. He closed in on Jack with a series of thrusts moments prior which is appropriate for the weapon. I also notice the usage of half hanging parries against attacks to the body in these kinds of movies which are perfectly valid actions.

Films set in the age of smallsword onwards have it easy though. It seems that by the time that virtually all masters settled for mostly linear, right foot forward, lunge-based swordplay, the evolution of European (or at least British) fencing became more or less linear up to their contemporary forms. Backsword/broadsword fencing at that point was very much related to smallsword. They'd share similar footwork and most of the positions. Biggest difference is one could actually cut and the parries and positions might have adjustments to acommodate that. Various masters like Zachary Wylde would teach smallsword first as the foundation before moving on to broadsword.

Even when the smallsword itself as a weapon fell out of use its martial knowledge survived as foil fencing. And just as broadsword and smallsword were related, so were the military sabre and foil. Just compare modern foil/epee/sabre guards and parries to the Napoleonic-era posters OP posted. Chances are, if your film is set around 1700s onwards and the choreography is based on modern fencing, you wouldn't be that far off. Foil/epee fencing with rapiers look weird but the really bad stuff happens when you base medieval fencing on absolute fiction.

Hope I got all that stuff correct.


File: 1608526048254.jpg (674.32 KB, 1200x675, fencing.jpg)

>Zachary Wylde


>James Miller (born 1947) is an American writer and academic. He is known for writing about Michel Foucault, philosophy as a way of life, social movements, popular culture, intellectual history, eighteenth century to the present; radical social theory and history of political philosophy. He currently teaches at The New School.


This entire thread reminds me of the phrase from the film, where, after Will announced that he made all the swords and practiced 3 hours a day, Captain Sparrow said he needed a girlfriend, kek.


File: 1608526101912-0.gif (4.29 MB, 620x344, WymianaKill5mb_c.gif)

File: 1608526101912-1.gif (4.85 MB, 648x360, stabbed.gif)


He's made some weapon animations for UNITY before. Good to know he's working on an actual game.



>tfw you planned to do something like this but with performance capture
>someone more skilled does it before you so you chance of being freed from your chains are now gone
Fuckig god damn it. Back to slaving for Porky to pay the bills I guess :\


File: 1608526637003.jpg (207.82 KB, 800x1575, modern armor in progress.jpg)

Bumping with a video for making ceramic based plates on the cheap. In testing they seem to stop 5.56 lead core with a steel penetrator (m855) surprisingly enough.

I knew a guy that survived a stabbing by sticking a couple of plastic cutting boards down the front of his coat, stopped the blade cold and distributed the shock out over his stomach so he barely even had a bruise.
He didn't survive depression though :(



That pretty cool thanks b-
>He didn't survive depression though
-oh. Sorry to hear that :(


Speaking of armor: idpol liberals are chimping out about "muh breast armor!" in the Mandolorian… ignoring the fact that armor accommodating for a female's body is the opposite of sexist.


Shadiversity of course came through again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpbjSmZx3m4


>Shashka animations losing and have no striking force
They're heavy as hell and are swung at crazy speeds, both those gifs are trash.


How did Shad manage to make a living off doing this shit?
Fuck me.


>twitter screencap
>Sarkeesian twitter screencap
Sure is /v/ in here.


why do retards love arguing about the dumbest shit

and yes im referring to both sides of this "debate"


File: 1608526834056.jpeg (832.83 KB, 2500x1500, Mando boob squich anita.jpeg)

>Muh /v/!
1) You've been spamming this exact same fucking response on every board on random threads, so fuck off samefag
2) It's related to the fucking thread you moron; armor in history and fiction.

How is the other side dumb? They're not the ones raving over a 10 second clip, and making some funny drawings and simple responses is incomparable to
Anita's rant about "muh boobies" over a slightly curved armor. An armor that fits both historical and modern day precedent, makes sense and is canon to the character and the Mandolorian culture-lore. People responded because she's a loud mouth whose inciting shit because she has nothing better to do except engage in "cancel-culture" and other slander.

Stay mad over cartoon boobs.


1) who the fuck cares
2) it fits more in the star wars thread anyways


>who cares
A lot of people apparently
>star wars thread
I posted it here since the topic is first-most armor and because Shadiversity made a recent video about the Mando armor and female armor in general. So I flsehd out the context before reposting the video.


How come quarterstaff technique isn't the same as bo staff technique? You'd think they would have arrived at the same general principles.


The latter is much lighter and faster compared to a heavier quarterstaff.


Absolute nonsense. Bo staves are generally the same length as quarterstaves and there are even historical accounts of people using metal bo staves.


>Bo staves are generally the same length as quarterstaves and there are even historical accounts of people using metal bo staves.
Every source I've read about bo staffs is that they're 5 or maybe 6ft at most.
The "English" quarterstaff starts at 7ft and goes up to 9.
A metal bo, probably hollow pipe, because solid metal would be clumsy as shit. Good for exercise and practice maybe.
Even then, a quarterstaff could be made of oak, ash (preferred), blackthorn, etc. In the 19th century they used bamboo and rattan, but only for safety reasons and because they were already making lances out of the stuff at the time.
Plus all bo are round, but a quarterstaff could be octagonal or oval so it has an "edge".
Basically no, a bo cannot be used the same as a proper quarterstaff.

But if you mean like a baton, bastone, jager/alpenstock, or some other short staff weapons, then yes they'd basically work the same.


File: 1608526835140.jpg (1.42 MB, 2736x3648, Japanese_bo.jpg)

>Even then, a quarterstaff could be made of oak, ash (preferred), blackthorn, etc.
Indeed, and so were many bo staves (and still are today). Pic related, a heavy bo with a hexagonal cross section at the part where you hit people. I've got a hardwood bo right next to me that's hefty and gives me a good workout.

I think you're really reaching for regional identity, a big stick is one of the simplest weapons to make and woody plants have been universally available to construct one in most cultures.


>Older bō were round (maru-bo), square (kaku-bo), hexagonal[7] (rokkaku-bo) or octagonal (hakkaku-bo). The average size of a bō is 6 shaku (around 6 ft (1.8 m)) but they can be as long as 9 ft (2.7 m) (kyu-shaku-bō).[2]


What is conditioning like in hema?
squats,pushups or just the swinging of heavy objects in itself?


I said LIGHTER and FASTER you angry speedreader. Where did I say shorter? And metal Bo can and often had hollow areas making them lighter.


Personally I use a 50cm steel-rod for weights with a 2kg weight on the end and repeat basic sword swings (up/down, left/right, diagonal,jabs, etc.) and it trains your arms well. I have no trouble swinging around ordinary one handed swords and heavy two-handers are much easier to handle.

Also a good exercise is rotating the sword in your hand like a shashka, as it helps the wrist be better used to more complex movements and swings


Huh, this thread came alive again for a bit. Guess I'll finally post this.

This is a fascinating example of the thing I was rambling about in >>4979 and >>5434 regarding common or repeated motions within a system. In fact, the meat of the system shown here apparently stems from 13 basic movements. Each can be applied in various ways (offensive or defensive, advancing or retreating, etc). and presumably combined with the other techniques depending on the stimulus to form a more complete play. Through this process, the stem of basic motions branch out into the whole applied art. This is the same process by which seemingly "simple" systems like Di Grassi's evidently become more "whole". The reversal of this, in turn, is what can be used to break down a more extensive treatise for whatever practical purposes you may have. It's a useful tool to put things into perspective.

Teachers and researchers will find all this obvious, I'm sure, but it's quite a journey for newbies or plain amateurs like me to come to this topic by themselves with little access to an instructor or fellow fencers to discuss with. Also, I erroneously typed 28 windings instead of 24 for some reason. My bad.

History from the description:
>Wudang Swordsmanship 13 techniques (武當劍法十三勢)are introduced by “Magic Sword” General Li JingLin (李景林) in 1920s. General Li met and learnt Wudang Swordsmanship from a Wudang Sword Master Song WeiYi (宋唯一)from 1922. Ji(Strike), Ci(Stab), Ge(Block), Xi(Wash) are four main techniques in the original Wudang sword techniques which is taught by master Song WeiYi. General Li JingLin introduced these swords techniques to his soldiers, after he created his swordsmanship company(劍術連) in the army. General Li also invited other swordsmanship teachers such as Xing Yi Master Sun LuTang, Bagua Zhang Master Jia QiShen to his swordsmanship company as an adviser. From numerous sword sparring and experiments inside the swordsmanship company in the army, general Li and his crews extracted and analysed the practice movements. They developed 13 main techniques and called “Wudang swordsmanship 13 techniques (Wudang Jian Fa Shi San Shi)”
Yet again, some dude learned from and with plenty other people before passing down the gathered knowledge.

On a related note, it seems clear to me now that the often exaggerated or even abstract nature of the forms/kata of various "traditional martial arts" are largely the result of them being the physical equivalent of cryptic medieval verses that were recorded and passed down. They are meant to be dissected, understood and then applied, hopefully with accompanied text if available or at least a competent teacher. There are various aspects to study in each part, from body mechanics to handwork to footwork. In HEMA's case, we are lucky enough to have had medieval glossators and proper instructional books by the renaissance before the various practices died off.


>this thread came alive again for a bit
We have spurts of interest, people find something interesting/new, post it and start a brief discussion before it dies down for a month again.


>How did Shad manage to make a living off doing this shit?
>Fuck me.
Not the anon you're replying to, but Shad's not really any worse than Skallagrim (for example.)
The key to YouTube success seems to be putting out opinionated rants on subjects that enough people are interested in. And having a regular uploading schedule.




File: 1608526896632.jpg (316.79 KB, 901x690, Di_Grassi_7.jpg)

Okay, not to jerk the guy off any further, but this is unironically the best guide to footwork I've read so far. They're the most basic (hence, important) steps that practically everyone uses, but the most miraculous thing is the fact that he made a footwork section this concise and universal. The only confusing thing is that the figure has his left foot in front when the lines are meant for a right foot forward stance.

To put it more simply than it already is, you have full and half steps. Either can be forwards or backwards, straight or slanted though he says forward steps tend to be sloped while backwards tend to be straight. The two steps of the back foot that are given special attention are the oblique pass forwards and the circular compass, where the back foot circles behind the front. That's it. For earlier fencing that uses left-forwards as much, simply mirror the diagram and actions.

It's basically HEMA footwork 101 from a historical source. Only thing left to add I'd say is foot/hip turning and the role it plays in power generation.

Thanks for the new book!


Di Grassi is pretty based
I've used some of his stuff before and it's damn fun.
Shame he doesn't get the attention he deserves imo


How good would y'all rate the final swordfight in the first Rounin Kenshin Live Action film?


not quiet E in HEMA


I can imagine someone at a catwalk wearing this tbh


>the armored Court Jester


>Anita Sarkeesian
One time this idiot whined about video games using different skeletons/animations for male and female characters and said that women having wider hips is a social construct.


Kek really? You have to wonder if she's paid to specifically say these kinds of things, or if she's mentally ill. There are so many things you can latch on to from a 'feminist' standpoint, but SKELETONS?!


liberal progressive grift used to give alot of money, just like debatebro retards saying idiotic shit to generate clout these people used social problems to make up problems to be champions to get rich.


>have booby breastplate
>asshole thrusts a spear into my chest
>the outline of my boobies force the spear into one direction
>toward my fucking neck
not many such cases, because its fucking retarded


Шашка против катаны. Гражданское оружие (part of a series on 'cold' weapons)

trained to use Cossack saber (lesson No. 1)


>liberal progressive grift used to give a lot of money
yep, a la pic 1 related

You're the guy that got mad about pic 2 related right? Life isn't a videogame with hitboxes that if you land in a certain box it's counted a headshot or something. A face-mask is not the same as chest armor.
>implying gorgets or neck chainmail doesn't exist


File: 1633483739078.jpg (63.36 KB, 650x468, kelly gang armor.jpg)

Looks like they're about raid Euroa, mate


>You're the guy that got mad about pic 2 related right?
>Life isn't a videogame with hitboxes that if you land in a certain box it's counted a headshot or something.
I agree, and I'm sure booby armor would work sometimes. Its the "lucky shot" that fucks you, thats why you NEED to lower the chance of a lucky shot being impactful at all costs. Whats the point of spending so much time and effort to make booby armor when any retard with a pointy stick can foil your plan by being lucky?
>>implying gorgets or neck chainmail doesn't exist
I would still rather the weapon deflect to my side than toward my face :^)


>Its the "lucky shot" that fucks you, thats why you NEED to lower the chance of a lucky shot
Well it's kinda a tough choice if you have boobs, trust me, it ain't nice to have them smushed by metal, there's a reason that was a medieval form of torture for women.
>still rather the weapon deflect to my side than toward my face
fair enough


File: 1633485127524-1.jpg (83.24 KB, 822x594, armour_2.jpg)

Its a shame that we dont have many examples of women plate armor. I would guess they'd have steeper points in the middle to accomadate for the breasts.
The only historical example of human anatomy being rexplicitly epresented in armor (that I can think of) is ancient Greek armor having pecs and abs, which probably wasnt that smart either.


File: 1633486149590-0.jpg (82.31 KB, 586x960, 7Y2dXLY.jpg)

File: 1633486149590-1.png (647.21 KB, 736x384, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1633486149590-2.png (645.63 KB, 609x400, ClipboardImage.png)

Actually Shadiversity talks about historical female armor and pics related exist (and dick armor exists too). Joan of Arc had specific armor made for her, that had emphasized breast size (but no cleavage). The idea that it's a weak point is kinda bullshit though.

The lack of historical female armor is because War (combat) was and remains almost entirely a masculine endeavor and, while there are a few examples of female warriors and commanders, the further we get into the High and Late Middle Ages, the fewer women we see in combat (outside of rebellions and the defense of their own homes).

Prior to suits of plate armour, any women who needed to wear armour would have worn the same thing as the men: a hauberk (chain mail shirt) if they could afford it, leather armor or whatever else they could scrounge up if they were of less means.
even today women in the army have hard times getting armor that doesn't hurt them.

The BL Royal 16 G V Le livre de femmes nobles et renomées manuscript show some amazon warriors in what appears to be lames of plate combined with disks covering the torso. Whether the artist wanted that to be a female touch on the armour or a pair of rondel is not something we have an answer for.

Shad's specific videos on the topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KHz0qWQA9I Boob armor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBtvS5yhTA8 Female armor


Neat, TIL


You're quite welcome, as much of a noob as I am in practical swordsmanship (beginner level), I enjoy reading and learning about this content. Hence the /edu/ type content of this thread.


>dick armour
codpieces were just a fashion trend transposed on armour,and it lasted two century at best,but it's a fun historical trivia.
Jockstraps on the other hand actually exist today and there are both males and females models but they're quite modern in comparison.


>Who's laughing now? Huh?!
>farts then stabs you


They've got a really cool kinda aesthetic.
Would roll up with the lads wearing this to he revolution.


File: 1633532539326.jpg (1.23 MB, 3581x4096, waifu.jpg)

>ceremonial, parade, or gladiatorial/dueling armour is indicative of anything

also Kastenbrust armour is the one Joan had.


File: 1633654115998.jpg (188.53 KB, 960x802, hand that draws you.jpg)

Which is the most useful of three?
- Tongue Dexterity
- Non-Dominant Hand Dexterity (ambidexterity)
- Legs Dexterity

And explain why in terms of combat, every day life and sex


File: 1633659840629.png (39.98 KB, 250x237, ClipboardImage.png)

Nah it'd be a stabbing using a comedic weapon and then the "who's laughing now"
Looks cool but it's heavy as fuck, and not much against modern high calibre handguns.
Yep, protecting your schlong is important XD


File: 1633660046162-0.png (896.78 KB, 632x512, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1633660046162-1.png (813.17 KB, 700x450, ClipboardImage.png)

>Kastenbrust armour is the one Joan
A custom set
>ceremonial, parade, or gladiatorial/dueling
armor is armor, also nice ignoring the entire rest of the post reddit spacer
Besides I only listed East Asian and West Europe. I didn't include East-Europe and Central Asia; Mongolian female warriors wore the leather armor that men used (clothing there is pretty unisex). And Bogatirshas / female slav "valkyries" used mostly chainmail armor that didn't compress the breasts, sometimes additionally armored with… yes boob plates. Unfortunately little remains of this.




/pol/ is truly amazing sometimes


>1. The helmet is ALL WRONG as I've explained a MILLION TIMES. Mohawks were Greek, sideways were Roman centurians
>2. The lorica segmentata definitely doesnt fit, meaning the weight distribution is all wrong. He's gonna be really tired after a knight of patroling the local bodega.
>3. The gladius is on the wrong side. Soldiers wore it on the left, because they help their scutum on the right. Difficult to draw a gladius while its blocked by a massive shield. However, it would be correct if he is larping as a centurian.
>4. The gladius also looks like the grip is too short. The ideal grip is to hold it like a hammer, and your hand fit snugly between the hilt and the pommel. If tailored correctly, your chops/swings will be so much more powerful.
>5. The blue cape isnt bad, blue was a rare dye back in the day. If he is indeed larping as a centurian, the color matches, as centurians were generally aristocrats from rich families.
>6. Romans didnt call it the SPQR or had any flag. Whats up with the scorpion, is he saying he has aids or something?

All in all, it looks like he got most of his shit from a flea market or wish.com
Proper tailoring of armor and weapons are just as important as having them. This is why the armor style fell out of use, it was too complicated to make and future generations couldn't use handmedowns effectively
Also, no chainmail?


Imagine how humiliating it would be to get your ass kicked dressed like that


Is there any practical reason for the head brush or is it purely aesthetic?


>figure 1: properly fitted lorica segmentata
>figure 2: probable gladius replica


wasn't the lorica sqaumata more common during Most of the empire ?


I have absolutely no idea I’m asking the Caesarboo anon


Centurians used a sideways plumage. This js because they were always in the front line. He entire squad needed to know where he was at all times. However, the plumage often worked against them, signaling to enemies who the biggest target was.
The Greeks probably wore them the way they did as a form of intimidation, and perhaps a way to signal that they were infact Greek.
Obviously the Romans took the style and look from the Greeks.
Eventually, the Romans stopped wearing them into battle, because of how annoying they were. They began only wearing them for triumphs and parades and religous occasions.

Yeah, the early empire used them a lot, when it was prosperous. The later empire did away with it in favor of chainmail and cataphracts


File: 1633468715318.jpg (162.32 KB, 1143x805, Vercprofile.jpg)

if cops came at protests dressing like romans,why can't rioters arrive dressing like anti-romans? the choices are limitless,you got the punics,the egyptians(it will even go perfectly with BLM),the greeks,the germans,and my favorite,the gauls,just look at that helmet.


File: 1633469005907-0.jpg (82.11 KB, 612x613, Scythian Cataphract.jpg)

File: 1633469005907-1.png (557.59 KB, 492x408, Sarmatian-1.png)

Do you think a line of riot cops could stand their ground against a Scythian cavalry charge and subsequent retreating arrow shots?
Probably not.


File: 1633469277829.png (302.9 KB, 480x268, ClipboardImage.png)

I'm just saying, a common weapon among protesters is Molotov cocktails, and this guy is wearing a Mohawks and a cape that is probably made of cotton, do the math.


they can't but training/feeding horses at this time and age is very costy, so just find a bike with really good performance,grab a pole and just charge them or somthing.


You have the sword and shield thing backwards. They carried their shields on the left and wore their scabbards on the right (in contrast to typical expectation for swords) to draw more easily while in formation.


That wont work. The point of shock calvalry is to but as much weight behind the charge.

You can see them walk up slowly, conserving energy, stopping just out of missile range.
Then they all start galloping as close together as they can. You see them get closer and closer. You hear the far off rumble.
They arent even halfway to you, and the ground is shaking. Your armor is rattling, your comrade to either side lower their pikes, and you remember to do the same. You realize the pike is fucking heavy, your arms start trembling.
They're almost there, its louder than anything you've ever heard. They spread out, and you see hundreds of other horses that were hiding behind the closely packed front line. They lower their spears.
Your comrade breaks, and flees.
They're almost there. Your head is ringing from the hundreds of 1 ton beasts trampling the ground. You look behind you, and all your comrades are gone
you couldn't hear the order to retreat, the battle was already lost, and now you are dead

If you watch the movie "Napoleon" (which was made with the help of the red army BTW), even well trained and disciplined soldiers couldnt stop themselves from breaking during a fake and entirely safe scenario. The power of a cavalry charge would give people PTSD back then.

tl;dr lorica segmentata isnt bullet proof lol


Yeah you're right.
He's doing 1 thing right at least


>the egyptians(it will even go perfectly with BLM)
Bruh, not this shit again…


you can't escape the culture war anon, no matter how much time passes,idpol comes back again to bite you in the ass.


tfw you will never shoot riot cops from horse back with your compound recurve bow….


always thought nobody really thinks hard enough about how much of an advantage certain old timey weapons gave you.

If you are some peasant with basic weapons, a fully armoured knight was more or less invincible unless you can knock them over or hit a weak spot, but in terms of penetrating their armour with your shit sword, spear, whatever, doubtful. Also the weapon they have is probably a much better quality than yours.

imagine trying to cut through thick steal with another piece of steel, you get one swing and then then chop you to pieces because you only have some half ass leather thing. Plus, these guys have been trained since birth, and eat a much, much better diet than you. Its really no contest. Now put that on a horse and x by 100, you're fucked. Fleeing is the logical thing to do. There is basically no way you can win, you are a place marker so slow the charge down while they get shot with arrows.


File: 1633474172228-0.jpg (51.86 KB, 600x433, half-swording.jpg)

File: 1633474172228-1.jpg (77.19 KB, 613x886, bullet proof test 1.jpg)

Pretty much.
Full plate armor wasnt even that heavy, given it was properly fitted.
Your only hope against a fully armored knight was to use some sort of blunt weapon, or slip your sword into a gap in the helmet or armpit.
Some armors were even rated for bullet proofing against primitive guns. If you see a round dent in a helmet or piece of armor in a meuseum, it might be from the test.


Heres a fairly accurate short film about a knight kicking ass


when you say not that heavy how heavy are we talking? In kilograms if possible


After you guys are done mods should merge this into the HEMA thread on >>>/hobby/3859


It varies wildly.
English armors were different from German armors were different from Czech armor, etc.
What I can say, is the "heaviest" part of the armor is actually the chainmail by far.

>A complete suit of plate armour made from well-tempered steel would weigh around 15–25 kg. The wearer remained highly agile and could jump, run and otherwise move freely as the weight of the armour was spread evenly throughout the body. The armour was articulated and covered a man's entire body completely from neck to toe.

>A short-sleeved shirt of chainmail typically weighs around 7 kg. A long-sleeved shirt reaching to the mid-tights or further is called a hauberk. Hauberks like that can weigh 10 kg. A hauberk with coif attached weighs 1.5 kg more whereas a separate coif brings about 2.5 kg to scale. An additional pair of mail mittens or gloves weighs 1 kg. The legs can be protected by a pair of chausses which adds another 4 kg. To cover the whole body this adds up to about 18 kg.

If the plate is fitted properly, the weight will distributed evenly across below the waist, and mostly on the hips for above the waist.
There are many different configurations and layering that different European nations used throughout a span of over 1000 years, so it's kind of hard to generalize.

I cant believe I missed the hema thread wtf


>I missed the hema thread wtf
the board is slow, it's not a common topic


Another important part that is hardly ever covered in Hollywood is the grappling. If you get their ass on the ground, now they're a sitting duck, and the fight is pretty much over.
The only problem with the video is that they didn't mentioning ending the enemy rightly with the pommel.


File: 1633741113121.gif (Spoiler Image, 6.48 MB, 600x338, EndHimRightly.gif)

pretty good vid
it's easy to imagine how it will go


>takes out axe


I used to want to be a choreographer

But then I had a motorbike smash my knee :(


Kek, nice reference

Reminds me a bit of Predator Dark Ages


File: 1634321371701.jpg (510.03 KB, 1219x822, Cod.I.6.4º.2_103r.jpg)

Two knights closely inspecting the grass.
Details unknown.


Kek literally an ancient Touch Grass meme



This sounds exactly like the kind of pun a Jester'd use before killing someone.


Shadiversity covered Dune's body shield tech in regards to HEMA type combat.


Maybe I'm stupid but wouldn't the shields from Dune just result in people using more blunt force? At least in the movie version the shield might stop the attack from connecting to your body, but we see the force still transfers with kicks and so on, so if you bop someone around with a maul or trip them with a staff it should still work, right? Maybe the dominant strat would be to wield a spear so you get reach and leverage to knock or trip someone to the ground and then maneuver the spearhead under the shield once they're off their feet. Shad thinks they'd use shorter blades for up close, but you can still keep someone at a distance with a spear. Maybe there would be some tension between the two methods, IDK.

He also makes the point at the beginning that if you just stop the blade at the barrier, then the speed is 0 and it doesn't take a lot of effort to move the blade slowly through the shield. It makes the shields seem kind of self-defeating if they don't at least make the blades bounce off, since the shield blocking the blade does the work for you of decelerating the swing, so you could just swing normally for the most part. I think it's just one of those things that has more of a thematic purpose and is difficult to really explain or portray in a way that makes sense.






File: 1635949048395.png (1.34 MB, 920x768, ClipboardImage.png)

>slow penetration
Not really an option in a high-speed melee battle or at range. The opponent isn't just going to stand and let you do damage. In the Droideka of Star Wars this makes sense in terms of an exploitable weakness - roll EMP or HE grenades past the shield and fry/blast them.


Goblin Slayer is pretty interesting in its discussion of armor and arms in (essentially) spelunking of deep tight caverns.


I think the Dune shields have a fatal vulnerability.

If you put an explosive on a stick with a trigger in the tip, the shield would let the explosive pass through (if the stick is gingerly wielded) and then contain the fast moving blastwave within the shield, turning the shield wearer into instant mush. POP stick

There are variations of this method: A blowtorch/flamethrower on a stick( heat is fast moving particles and therefore the shield should also be a near perfect insulator, which should make for some crispy results). A compressed air hose on a stick or overpowered tazer on a stick would work as well. A spray of supercooled ethanol-dry-ice slurry would freeze the guy in the shield.

To make this into a ranged weapon you mount the stick on some kind of remote controlled vehicle or flying thing.

The dune universe also has artificial gravity generators, and like in any other scifi series this gets overlooked. If you switch it on and off with alternating polarity a few times per second, nobody will be able to fight because they are to busy smacking against the floor and sealing.

Unique IPs: 25

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]