Well that was a very interesting discussion and overall experiment. I participated to an I.33 workshop during a big HEMA event held in my city last week. When asked about differences with Bolognese sword and buckler, the instructor said pretty much exactly was came out of your debriefing. Bolognese swords being longer and having a more protective hand guard, covering the sword hand with the buckler is not that needed and you can afford to whip the sword around and focus less on bind.
Big thanks to Herbert for giving me the opportunity to spar with him, it was an honour! I really enjoyed it and to listen to the two of you exchanging your thoughts on the sources and the historical background. Looking forward to future collabs 😄
you mention ~17:00 mark or so that 'comp[aring styles that never would have met' but... im inclined to disagree.. given in the renaissance, there were dussaks, hangers, katzbalgers, and other still much more 'choppy' broadswords i could see this man with a shorter choppier broadsword or a hanger going full I:33 i.e more binds etc, he'd want to close with this agile and thurst centric side sword, and use the pressure of the bind etc to help close the distance and push the point aside
It would be totally legit to assume that there were fencers in the 16th century that had a more bind-concentrated style and would have preferred to use a shorter weapon, I'm with you there, yes! :) If there were fencers around that time who knew about the I.33 manuscript or had learned from a master from that tradition is highly speculative, but not impossible, still it's more than 200 years... maybe they would have come from the Lignitzer-side though.
As Alex says at around 12:00 - working from the bind is in the sources, but the Bolognese masters have the tendency to avoid the bind as long a possible, to us it is more like an "if in doubt, don't do binds"-approach. And if you'd put techniques with bind and without side by side, the latter would be the vast majority. (Everything open to interpretation to a certain degree of course.)
Well that was a very interesting discussion and overall experiment.
I participated to an I.33 workshop during a big HEMA event held in my city last week. When asked about differences with Bolognese sword and buckler, the instructor said pretty much exactly was came out of your debriefing.
Bolognese swords being longer and having a more protective hand guard, covering the sword hand with the buckler is not that needed and you can afford to whip the sword around and focus less on bind.
Big thanks to Herbert for giving me the opportunity to spar with him, it was an honour! I really enjoyed it and to listen to the two of you exchanging your thoughts on the sources and the historical background. Looking forward to future collabs 😄
Nice chat, interesting observations. Thanks :)
Great fun!
I love her targa, I would love if cold steel made a HDPE version ❤
you mention ~17:00 mark or so that 'comp[aring styles that never would have met'
but... im inclined to disagree.. given in the renaissance, there were dussaks, hangers, katzbalgers, and other still much more 'choppy' broadswords
i could see this man with a shorter choppier broadsword or a hanger going full I:33 i.e more binds etc, he'd want to close with this agile and thurst centric side sword, and use the pressure of the bind etc to help close the distance and push the point aside
It would be totally legit to assume that there were fencers in the 16th century that had a more bind-concentrated style and would have preferred to use a shorter weapon, I'm with you there, yes! :) If there were fencers around that time who knew about the I.33 manuscript or had learned from a master from that tradition is highly speculative, but not impossible, still it's more than 200 years... maybe they would have come from the Lignitzer-side though.
wait? bolognese buckler doesnt really do binds? at least not to the same extent that I:33 is famous for?
huh, interesting
As Alex says at around 12:00 - working from the bind is in the sources, but the Bolognese masters have the tendency to avoid the bind as long a possible, to us it is more like an "if in doubt, don't do binds"-approach. And if you'd put techniques with bind and without side by side, the latter would be the vast majority. (Everything open to interpretation to a certain degree of course.)