Again, look to the Royal Armouries records with blades at this width, they have been using them fot over a decade now.

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rod Walker:
I would much rather fight with and against a light, thinner, well made blunt then a thicker edged, heavier blunt.

How much fast, hard hitting, un-choreographed combat with steel swords against guys you have never met have you guys done?

---

--------------------

Cheers

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brent E Hanner:
quote:Originally posted by chef de chambre:
Hi Brent,

If you want to begin discussing physics, it can most reasonably be argued a lighter blunt is always safer, assuming the blunt is well made and properly hardened and tempered.

I'd recomend you do the math before you say that. Your reason and Newton don't agree.[/b]

---

Thats as may be, and you have a point if we were discussing blossfechten, but since the system specifically targets armoured areas, you are not taking that into consideration.

One is more likely to recieve injury through armour with a heavier weapon than a lighter one

quote:

---

quote:Right now, we and les Compagnons and Archiers de Frontenac have a great deal of flexibility on how we can fight together, and I am not sure I am willing to give up that flexibility to accomidate an untrained man

Then have your fun at your events.

Brent[/b]

[ 10-20-2005: Message edited by: Brent E Hanner ][/B]

---

Can you clarify what you mean by that Brent? Are you saying that you as an individual will not attend any events where these rules are allowed? Or are you speaking as the head of a group, or groups, and saying that these groups (Well Assured and True Men - I know, it is defunct, but just as an example) will not be willing to attend any event where these rules are in force? Who composed the IMA rules you speak of, and what is their experience of rebated combat?

In either case, I think that is both hasty on your part, and damaging to any concensus building efforts between groups, to come up with some system of interaction. When we spoke a month or so ago, you told me, specifically in regards to this problem " Find out what the Canadian groups do, or what rules they use, and adopt them".

This is exactly what I have been trying to do, following your own adivce - hey, these guys have been using steel blunts in very active combats, not choreographed ones since their founding in 1996. If they have no problem with the proposed rules, then I really do not see why you do.

Things aren't set in concrete yet, if you have a compelling argument as to why or why not do something, then by all means add it, but what experience are you basing your argument on? Basically, I just outlined in writing what we did at Mont St-Anne the last week, and made some modifications (mostly to archery) based on direct experiences we shared.

What isn't productive is to just refuse to participate in a discussion when the concensus isn't going along with you. Make your case, and also listen to what others have to say, and arrive at a consensus. That is the constructive thing to do. If people want to up the minimum edge width to 1.5mm, I have no problem with that either. I just think that if we are going to engage each other with steel weapons in sparring, then that if nothing else, they should handle as well as real swords, at least within reason (they should be well balanced), and that they should be weapons of good quality, and not sword shaped clubs, so they will be less likely to break in combat, and less likely to give injuries through concussion - YMMV.

--------------------

Also, in terms of familiarization, we've found it very valuable to simply have a stretch of time (usually an hour or so) for sets of paired-off fighters to have at each other on a play basis, just to get a sense of how the other guy plays and moves. With a marshall of some sort simply pointing out pairs, who play for a few minutes apiece and then switch out, and who, when all that's done, start doing small groups together, everybody's safety goes way up... while maintaining the flexibility that, imho, is a far better guarantee than onerous rules for everything except huge groups.

--------------------

I tell you all, I have followed Bob Reed's (Chef de Chambre's) discussions of various topics over a couple of years, and I am inclined to believe that he brings a rigorous understanding to every topic he shines his light on. He's an intellectual perfectionist by trade--not so good in some social settings, but downright excellent in matters like this.

I have a rebated sword that has a .5 to .7mm edge--and let me tell you I am not too askeered of it. I don't know how people can be asking for a 2mm rebated edge on a single-handed weapon. I just don't get it.

I say that the groups participating in Les Medievales du Mont-Saint Anne and in the northwest, make rules that make sense to you, dominate the larger event up there, and bring everyone to heel who comes up. Someone has to establish a foundation and this one seems well thought out. I will likely chivvy it for use in the western portion of the U.S., if things develop that way.

John
Jehan de Pelham, esquire (1370-1400 English in France)
Jehan de Pelham, esquire and servant of Sir Vitus

[ 10-26-2005: Message edited by: John McFarlin ]

Jenn

--------------------

Some additional thoughts, or appendices to the rules. Please give me your thoughts.

Having armour count for something, both as a means of trying to reflect reality, and as an additional safety factor. Something on the order of

An unarmoured man is automatically downed by any armoured opponent. A lightly armoured man (in a jack, for instance) may absorb a blow before becoming a casualty, a moderately armoured man (a half harness of a brigandine and arms, a jack and mail, or the like) can absorb 2 blows, and an heavily armoured man in full harness can absorb three.

This would be applicable to tactical scenarios.

Regarding casulaties - in most pre-arranged scenarios, casualties should probably be determined before the action. I like how they do it in some civil war reenactments, they figure out the casualty rate of a unit in an action, and pre-determine the number of men to drop, say, you two in the first volly, some more of you in the second, etc. In some scenarios, before the engagement in some units NCO's dole out blank rounds, and give out some other coloured than white ones, when the man draws a red cartridge, he falls dead at the next shot, a green one falls wounded, etc. Of course, we don't have the convienience of cartridge boxes to pull this sort of thing off, but I'm sure we can arrange some shift. I would think we want to in public displays,if we are to reenact an engagement, avoid the phenomenon in other eras of "ironshirts".

We had the opposite problem in Quebec, when Richard dropped like a pollaxed steer when he was shot by the arrow - as a reenactor, he thought in a flash "well, that shot would have killed me", and he dropped in place. Unbeknownst to him, he was bleeding, and when he tried to get across he was playing dead, the people talking to him thought he was really injured (well, he was bruised and had a slight cut, and was bleeding from it).

Another thought on casualties - the casualty should ensure his face is not exposed if any archery is underway.

Archery - in other-era reenactment, there are dead-lines, perhaps we should have archers disengage their fire, and draw melee weapons when a closing formation reaches a 30 yard/meter line in front of them. This would add to the overall effect, as archers had to do the very thing historically (although maybe they would chance a last shot that close). This might help make archery safer without resorting to completely un-arrow like projectiles.

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by John McFarlin:
Hear, Hear.

I tell you all, I have followed Bob Reed's (Chef de Chambre's) discussions of various topics over a couple of years, and I am inclined to believe that he brings a rigorous understanding to every topic he shines his light on. He's an intellectual perfectionist by trade--not so good in some social settings, but downright excellent in matters like this.

I have a rebated sword that has a .5 to .7mm edge--and let me tell you I am not too askeered of it. I don't know how people can be asking for a 2mm rebated edge on a single-handed weapon. I just don't get it.

I say that the groups participating in Les Medievales du Mont-Saint Anne and in the northwest, make rules that make sense to you, dominate the larger event up there, and bring everyone to heel who comes up. Someone has to establish a foundation and this one seems well thought out. I will likely chivvy it for use in the western portion of the U.S., if things develop that way.

John
Jehan de Pelham, esquire (1370-1400 English in France)
Jehan de Pelham, esquire and servant of Sir Vitus

[ 10-26-2005: Message edited by: John McFarlin ]

[ 10-27-2005: Message edited by: John McFarlin ]

---

Feel free to use them as you like. If we have a broadly similar ruleset, it will enable easy crossing to different events.

--------------------

I truly wonder if it's possible to make a "boffer bodkin" that would look not completely awful, yet absorb its inertia. The only thing I've seen that might come close is a Korean practice arrow... but even that is obviously not a military arrowhead. In my presentations to the public in Budapest, safety gear was never an issue (we actually stopped, put on wrist pads, and then fenced with the sabre), but I think in first-person presentation, it might come out much differently than the 3rd-person to which I'm accustomed.

--------------------

I don't believe that the type of weapon is an issue if one doesn't go bashing the other on the head "SCA style". Most fighters in every group down here has had a proper fencing formation relevant to the technique required by their rightful group and has had many years of practice (or squiring) before being allowed on the field with the big boys.

Most groups generaly use wooden swords for training (or in some cases crow-bar type of swords for weight, endurance and balance). But than switch to whatever sword (two hands, single hand, light weight, heavy and thick, whatever) and use it in a proper and sensible manner.

That said, all groups here forbid the consommation of alcool to any fighter. The two idiots cited previously were amateurs, not even part of a group.

I've seen things such as an helmet and plastron being bashed and molded on a person's body and head, but that was due to bad 18ggs equipment, the size of the sword wouldn't have made a difference.

In 15 years of reenactment did I ever see anyone being cut by a light sword ? No

In 15 years of reenactment did I ever see anyone being hurt by a bar-type of sword ? Yes but mostly fingers getting bashed because of a lack of gloves or gauntlets during practices. The only other incident that I've ever witnessed was a friend losing a tooth because someone had carelessely backed-up on him without looking where he was going and had hit him with the "pommeau" of his sword, not the blade itself.

So is it safe ; Yes. To anyone taking his oponent's experience and technique into consideration and not going at him on a "Jacky Chang" spree

--------------------

I'd also rather have a 1mm rounded edge on a lighter sword rather than a 2mm on a heavier one. My Del tins have 1 mm edges - graeter where I've done some additional rounding. Also, the DT edges from the factory are squared off - they need to be rounded.

Also - what of points? I'd suggest the "Nickel rule". All weapons to have a rounded tip diameter in profile no smaller than the size of a nickle (2 cm).

Regarding Blunts - do you have dimensions?

--------------------

All our arms and weapons will be fonctionnal: no round points or smooth finish. We want to present the real thing to the public and also for the pleisure of having nice reproductions in our hands.

Like Martin said, like Europeans groups, we are not enough to renact a battle with reallity. But we are enough people to renact some training with halbards.

I also think that renacting battles like it's made in the North-America medieval world it's more like a show or a stunt than an historically perfect reprodution of a real 15th century battle and needs rules to be done with security.

Whatever, in the real life of a soldier, battle is a very short part of his time. Battle goes a fews minutes or hours for severals days, weeks and months of campaing. The rest of the time he will make everyday tasks, pratice, etc. It's less spectacular for the public or for the members of the groups but it's authentic.

It depends what each group want to do. And it's why we have several groups, each person can find the group who make the hobby the manner he want. And with respect between all thoses groups, we can have nice events together!

Martin

--------------------

For sure this type of military presentation will be very attractive, authentic and impressive. It's our project in the future to develop something like that. We will be not 300 members...but, I think a few persons well trained could also make a nice effect and give a lot of fun to the participants!

I said it was "less spectacular" because our group is sometime put away because our renacting is more "static"(in the actual minding here): cooking, sewing, wasching, some arts and craft, etc. Some public event want a more active presentation with battle, firearms, combat, etc, and not only in the medieval renacting. Other periods have the same thinking sometime.

In this case the type of "show" we can offer is less impressive at first sigh for the organizers of some events. Because to appreciate our living history, visitor have to be near us, talk with us, check out our work. It's a more interactive presentation, the visitor need to be more attentive and curious to receive informations and be impressionated. But, an interesting part of the public seam to like that very hard.

I think it's like in Europe, they have some groups involved in live combat like the Chevaliers de Franche-Comté for exemple and other groups more in everyday camp life like the Company of Sainte-Georges. Am I right?

Martin, if you could have been there for the rest of the week, you could have seen many Pike formation, archery, and less sword fighting... But, when the cavalry charged, they used lance and sword... so the sword fighting was more between coustillier and the knights... but with 40 bowmen, pikeman etc... and we did lot of marches, formations in silence, at pace. (aux pas),there was not 400 people, but we manage to do historical stuff at small scale...

So the goal here is to put bases and help people exchange technic of fighting, not just with sword, but with pikes, bow...

Finally, maybe it is always better elsewhere

--------------------

BUT, your ideal, is maybe not the one people have here, and I think there is no good IDEAL... Small steps, yep, but to go where?... Your ideal or the one people think the best for there own "trip"

--------------------

Sure, reenactment for us is Burgundy of the Xvth century, but what is going on actually in Europe is not necessairly the holy Truth!!!

Fighting is part of reenacting history as it is for your study of writing. So do we have to stop doing combat? I thinks that what you have seen is not the real show that was going on.

What we have done the rest of the week was base on research, discussion and essay, not just a show for the public!!!

What we do is not really stage combat, but it's not really reenactment combat either.

The techniques used are elaborations based on moves presented in fightbooks but not exact copies of those moves. The armours and weapons are not exactly replica material. Concessions are made for the safety of the participants. As such, the type of combat repesented by Les Compagnons is not an exact representation.

However, we do show the intensity and the violence of combat. The hits are real, the dents are real, and that's probably how these things were fought. With intensity and violence. Showing the perfect footsteps from Talhoffer is an admirable thing, but
there is also a place for the actual fight in this game.

The core of the issue is really this: fighting is an integral part of the life of a soldier on campaign (which is a goal of the Les Compagnons d'Arme presentation), and while the type of combat presented might not be "up to code" for certain, it is still the best representation of live combat we could come up with.

We are working hard to get the social aspect developed to its full potential (being from the new crop, I will push for this a lot!) Others are willing to put the necessary efforts as well.

We admit to not being perfect, but we are learning as we go, and I feel it is better to do something with what we have than to hold on and do nothing until we are perfect.

[ 11-12-2005: Message edited by: Martin ]

--------------------

Now it didn't feel very hard, but I am quite sure that the narrow profile did have quite a bit to do with the damage to my flesh. I'm am certainly not saying that the same hit from my 2mm Armour Class blade wouldn't have drawn blood, but it would have been a more contused wound.

On the same light I have another wound healing on the side of my knee from another 1.5 mm blade lightweight blade. This one is more contused, but it was also through cloth.

It would appear logically that a thinner edged blade would more likey open you up on an unarmoured area.