(With thanks to Lilias de Cheryngton for editing this. Otherwise, it wouldn't be remotely intelligible.)
One of the common remarks I hear about historic technique is that it doesn't work well in the SCA. On the contrary, I think there's a lot of room for the use of period techniques in rapier (and for that matter, in Cut & Thrust) over those of sport fencing, but there are absolutely barriers to their full adoption by the SCA rapier community. I think that these barriers can be problematic to the point of turning people entirely off from the study and use of period techniques, and that is unfortunate. At the very least, we should be able to use historical techniques in bouting situations within the bounds of our rules, and I argue we should make an effort to work past the hurdles and do so.
One of the common remarks I hear about historic technique is that it doesn't work well in the SCA. On the contrary, I think there's a lot of room for the use of period techniques in rapier (and for that matter, in Cut & Thrust) over those of sport fencing, but there are absolutely barriers to their full adoption by the SCA rapier community. I think that these barriers can be problematic to the point of turning people entirely off from the study and use of period techniques, and that is unfortunate. At the very least, we should be able to use historical techniques in bouting situations within the bounds of our rules, and I argue we should make an effort to work past the hurdles and do so.
In this brief essay, I would like to
discuss the issues that can interfere with the use of historic technique, and offer
a few ways we can try to avoid, remedy, or at least mitigate them. The crux of
the issue is, essentially, people don't
fight the right way for the techniques to work. I will elaborate on this
rather broad statement in the following ways:
- Reasons due to safety concerns.
- Calibration.
- Speed and intent of attack.
- Body contact.
- Reasons due to influence of rules on combat (or “gaming
the system”).
- Double kills.
- Touch calibration.
- Reasons due to mindset.
- Modern influence - sport fencing.
- Lack of fear - point fear, fear of death.
- Lack of period priorities.
There is certainly some crossover
between these categories, but my hope is that breaking it up in this manner
will facilitate discussion.
Safety Concerns
Safety concerns are probably the
more intimidating issues to cover - who wants to ignore safety and really
injure their opponent or themselves? That being said, they're also pretty easy
to address, since they tend to be concerned solely with the fighter initiating
the attack.
The first safety issue is that of
calibration. Initially, it looks like we need to thread a needle between
"safe" and "historically accurate." Look at some of those
plates - they want you to hit someone so there's a foot or more of steel coming
out the other side! How hard would you need to hit someone to do that, though?
The answer is to adjust the angles necessary to perform the technique safely as
well as effectively. Modifying the technique slightly from the original will
take more study and practice, but changing the angles slightly to allow you to
perform it safely in SCA combat is worth it. Sometimes you can simply place the
tip of your blade on your opponent and not finish the skewering movement, but performing
the technique without the prescribed follow-through could leave you vulnerable.
A large subset of period techniques require
proper intent and speed for them to work, making safety more of an issue. These
techniques should be worked up to, and practiced until they can be performed
safely – much like any “modern” fencing technique a person uses for the first
time! Until you can perform them safely, do not use them in an uncontrolled
bout. Given enough practice, it is quite possible to perform period techniques while
being ready to break your wrist or arrest your forward motion on contact.
Body contact can be a larger hurdle,
depending on your home kingdom. If your kingdom allows fleeting contact in
accordance with the society standards for rapier, you have a fair amount of
freedom to play with. You still can't grab, pull, grapple, or strike, but you
don't need to worry about accidentally bouncing off your opponent, or
performing techniques that require you to put your hands on their limbs to
check their motion. If you are forbidden to use body contact, there are still
large amounts - honestly, the majority - of historical techniques you can use
without any change whatsoever; you just happen to be somewhat restricted in
what you can choose from. Nearly every
period technique either fits, or can be modified to fit, within our safety
rules.
Influence of Rules on Combat
A much thornier issue is how the
rules of our game unduly influence the course of combat. This might also be
termed "gaming the system." Sometimes it's intentional on the
fighter's part, sometimes it isn't, but the rules have an effect either way.
Double kills are the first problem
here, and they are two-fold. First, there is the practice in the East where, when
each opponent strikes the other at nearly the same time, the second is
considered late and not counted, regardless of whether it was in motion at the
time the first shot landed. (Note: Society rules specify that if a shot is in
motion when the first blow lands, the second shot is still good, which neatly
obviates this issue.) The Eastern practice encourages speed while ignoring
defense; as long as you get that first touch, whatever happens afterward is
irrelevant, no matter how large a bruise it leaves. This can lead to poor
defense, and is a horrible practice in general. The period masters agreed,
using the concept of "after-blow" to describe its dangers. Dealing
with this is relatively easy – I suggest adopting the society rule on the
matter, and the problem should remedy itself. You'll either see better
fighting, or a sudden spike in double kills (which should encourage better
fighting).
The second issue with double kills
is the fact that, much of the time, double kills are not punished. It can be
common practice, to make life easier on the MoL, to re-fight double kills until
there is a winner. There are no negative consequences. This has another easy
solution: to quote Don Dylan ap Maelgwn, "Dead is dead." A double
kill counts as a loss for both combatants. It could be awkward if both
finalists in a tournament are eliminated this way, but a special provision
could be made in this case.
The other major rule issue has to do
with touch calibration. In kingdoms where lightest touch calibration is
preferred, a number of bad habits can develop. It's easier to not commit to
your attacks, tap people gently as you're flinging yourself backwards, or touch
your target many times in rapid succession, but in ways that wouldn't even
realistically break the skin. Beyond altering what your region views as
acceptable, it is difficult to remedy this for other fighters. Certainly
though, you can ensure that you are placing your weapon firmly and well, making
good committed attacks against your opponent. The benefit to doing so is that
it is much harder for those shots to
be ignored – intentionally or not – and that is a benefit in itself.
Mindset
Finally, we come to mindset. This is
the area individual fighters can most readily change in themselves, and even
lead by example in their communities.
First, the fighter should look to
any modern influences on their fighting. The majority of us still have foil and
epee roots even within the society, even if they never officially did sport
fencing. There is also a definite perception that techniques derived from sport
fencing need to be used in order to win.
For people who came to the SCA from
sport fencing, there is absolutely a hurdle of ingrained responses to get past.
Especially if these responses win bouts, it is hard to let them go in favor of
more period techniques. However, I would point out that sport fencing
techniques are primarily designed around sport fencing weapons - which period
weapons are assuredly not. The difference in weight alone could lead to injury,
either in execution of technique on your opponent, or simply through muscle
strain on yourself. Additionally, with as much difference as there is between
modern weapons and period ones, the techniques used with modern weapons aren't
designed for the heavier, longer, and otherwise different period weapons. Period
technique was designed for period weapons. While there is absolutely going to
be a learning curve in learning or re-learning techniques with the weapons we
use, I feel that it will ultimately be more comfortable and have a higher
success rate - as well as being closer to what the SCA is ostensibly about.
Another issue which can dramatically
affect how the fight plays out is the lack of fear. There may be a deep concern
for winning; fighting well for your royalty, kingdom, or inspiration; and
simply performing well. However, that is different from looking at your
opponent and realizing a missed parry might mean death - possibly a quite
painful one over days or weeks. In our game, there's no fear of mortality, and
there's not even any “point fear.” Look at a tipped rapier pointing right at
you. Now take the tip off and do it again. It's suddenly a lot harder to pin
down where the point of the blade is. That difference in perspective, combined
with the fact that it is pointed right at your vital organs, is scary.
It might be melodramatic, but it drastically changes how people fight. Without
live steel, what's the worst that will happen? You might lose. Maybe you'll get
hit a little hard. Because of this, people are willing to take risks, fight
unsafely, and do things that they'd never even consider if the fight were real.
All of these mental aspects of the
game roll up into the final point - the lack of period priorities. The manuals
I'm personally familiar with are very clear on one point: worry about defending
yourself first and make sure you are perfectly safe before you consider attacking
your opponent. For instance, Capo Ferro states, “Therefore, it is moreover seen
that defense is the principal action of fencing. No one should proceed to
offense if not through the route of legitimate defense.” This means that
gunslinging, willingness to sacrifice a limb to land a hit on your opponent, and
trying for a double kill are out. Combat is serious because blood can be shed.
This isn't to say we shouldn't try to have fun out there, or that we shouldn't
be trying new things, working on different techniques, and relaxing (especially
in pickups with friends) - not every fight needs to be kill-or-be-killed. When
it matters, though, I believe internalizing the period fighting mentality does
a lot for encouraging the use of period technique.
One of the great things about SCA
rapier is the degree to which, even keeping our safety rules in mind, we are
able to train and use period techniques as we fight. I believe encouraging this
in ourselves and in our communities is important to what we do, both as
historical fighters, and as members of the SCA.
What's your opinion on how "Armor as Worn" tournaments fit into encouraging period techniques, if at all? Could we combine the two somehow?
ReplyDeleteMy knee-jerk reaction is to think that they're amusing, but that depending on the rules it's possible to become nearly invulnerable to anything except unsafe techniques like grapples, throws, and breaks.
DeleteOf course, it's not like there's a standard set of conventions for Armor as Worn, so that's something to think about, too.
That said, I think that they'd function far better under the Cut and Thrust rules, in that you could more readily come up with weapon and armor combinations under there that would make sense, as opposed to the civilian weapon that the rapier is - I don't know off the top of my head of commonly worn civilian armor.
I might be wrong, though. I clearly need to do more reading.
I've wanted to do an <armor as worn" tourney a bunch of times, but my game-design brain keeps breaking the rules. The more I work it, the more it comes out looking like our old targeting and wound rules.
DeleteI've never seen/been in an "Armor as Worn" tourney, but if it's what it sounds like, I kinda agree with Donovan. I'd be cool with a limited version... say, if you're fighting cloak and have it wrapped around your hand, it's more protected than what the current rule is.
DeleteSince rapiers is more of a civilian weapon, it makes sense that the "armor" would just be their normal clothes (cloak included). I like Donovan's idea about how it could work for C&T, though.
In my experience, it makes a great open sparring event, and a lousy tournament.
DeleteI came from foil fencing and the biggest hurdles for me were sword weight/length and technique. A lot of what I learned in foil didn't cross over into rapier. Once I started studying Capo Ferro my skill set increased rapidly.
ReplyDeleteFor me, winning/losing = "point fear." I want to win, and I want to win cleanly so I try to make sure I'm safe when attacking and not participating in a quick draw with someone. It also helps that I'm shorter and use a shorter weapon, so I need to be more "cautious"
By the way, if I manage to carve out time (between college football season, two classes towards my Ph.D., WMAW next week, theatre tickets on Friday, and working full time), I'm going to write what I hope will be a helpful critique of your essay.
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to see it, if you can get the time away from all that, y'know, life stuff.
Delete