How often were HANDS WOUNDED in real SWORD FIGHTING?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- How often were hands hit, wounded, or targeted, in real historical sword fighting?
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfight...
Matt Easton's website:
www.matt-easto...
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-sw...
![KAYTRANADA - Witchy (feat. Childish Gambino) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jGK3YVmGZ3Y/mqdefault.jpg)
One practical detail I’ve found in melee/group sparring is that people tend to attack when they have the opportunity to flank an opponent, in which case the hand isn’t even presented towards you and thus isn’t readily available. In a group fight it’s best to attack someone when they are pointing their weapon at someone else.
There's no honour in that.
@@wrobelmike there's no honor in a group fight 🤷♂️ honor is for duels, group fights are for survival.
@@SpidermAntifa Massed melee is the art of the cheap shot. You're always looking for the guy who's not looking at you.
@@wrobelmike Haha. The way I wrote it does make it seem dirty! What I described is a scaled up, group version of "taking the line." Usually, we train not to attack someone on their strong line. In a duel, if an opponent has their point on you (or is threatening you with a cut), you usually want to either move their line or move yourself off their line (the strength of their attack)-then hit them in an opening. Same concept, except with multiple people.
@@wrobelmike honor doesn't matter much if you're dead
I feel like attention economy in a battle is an issue as well. Sniping requires that you focus carefully on your opponent, which is a luxury you don't have when you need more situational awareness.
Depends on your weapons and the guys next to you.
Matt featured a couple of historical Chinese longswords a few months ago. The one intended for training and sparring had an elaborate handguard. The one intended for the battlefield had almost no hand protection.
True that,good observation!
the battlefield one was intended to be used with a gauntlet, training maybe not so much
I like the term "Deep Target" to describe attacking something past your opponent's guard, I will be stealing it for use in my own conversations. The length of an arm doesn't feel that big under normal circumstances, but in a sword fight every inch in that last 2-3 feet between striking the hand and striking the body matters a lot.
We all like the term DEEP target 😂
As you pointed out: every inch matters... The length of an arm in some cases can feel very long 🤣
Also applies to knife fighting.
I imagine - as far as sources talking about mass combat as opposed to duels, and the prevalence of attacks to the hand, that there is also another factor at play; We tend to report, in retelling things, what is interesting and spectacular for a situation. If you are recounting the story of two men, having a sword-fight, then the detail of a hand-injury may be pertinent and pivotal to the story. If you're recounting the story of 500 men having a swordfight, then the number of hand-injuries probably seem like a waste of good ink.
In one of the many BBC presentations on archaeology that I have watched, one of the archaeologists stated that amputation of the hand was the most common medieval battle injury. They went on to say that after a major battle there was a surge in left handed craftsmen (presumably members of a levy).
I used to do very crude sparring with foam and duct tape over wooden stick swords, and I fully agree with the notion that in situations where you have many opponents, you tend to jump to the "kill shots" because that takes pressure off you one way or the other - either they back off a bit or they're taken out. Even in the heat of the moment, when you're doing three on one, even using silly 90's practice swords, people do keep more distance when they see a normally careful attacker suddenly unexpectedly going for skulls and trying to impale your torso.
In 2-1/2 decades of LARPing, I think I took about thirty or forty hand hits. I took several times more (illegal in that rules system) accidental head shots.
Keeping in mind that in a LARP there are a lot more fights in a day than would be likely in real combat, if only from the time needed to heal from non-fatal injuries.
@@MonkeyJedi99 I used to get that many hand hits a month when I took Kendo (legal hit in that system). Head hits? Well, look at kendo's most basic training cut - a helmet cleaving overhead slash......
@@muninrob Definitely a different sport. But I imagine kendo has equipment to prevent/reduce injury to those legal hit areas, yeah?
I'm sure about the helmets, but I never paid attention if there was hand protection.
-
In the LARP I played, armor was only worn for point value, not protection against real damage. So there was a good amount of Naugahyde, soft leather, and aluminum or stainless steel (butcher mesh) chainmail.
One of my characters had scale mail made from cut up 50 gallon plastic trash cans.
@@MonkeyJedi99 Hand protection in kendo is OK(ish) - about as good as it can be and still have the ability to change your grip on the fly. The helmet protects, but the katana stand in being split bamboo and NOT trying to cut your opponent in half all the way to the floor make a MUCH bigger difference than the helmet.
I won't do pairs training with Boken or live blades - those can & will kill if an accident happens.
Foam fighting, kendo, fencing, hema, all do not make you an expert in real fighting. If you want to spout off based on your "experience", then please restrict yourself to your experience in the conditions under question. Were you and your oponnent(s) fighting for your life? No? Then you are taking your non-combat experience and basically talking BS.
I'll listen to any foam fighter, kendo practitioner, fencer, etc. about what works in the rules system that they play in. But don't tell me that those experiences give you the knowledge to expound on what happens when people meet other people with steel in hand and their lives on the line.
Thank you for the excellent reply! Glad I could inspire a video. :D As always, context, but the idea of it being increased in duels as opposed to general melee makes total sense. I am aware of the "monkey brain" impulse to strike the source of the threat, i.e. the hand holding the weapon, and have seen that not only in sniping, but also as a panic response to not seeing a blow coming in sparring. This makes things like the schiavona and "doge" swords existing at the same time, in the same place, have a clearer context for me, as the more protected sword was carried as a sidearm by the professional bodyguard, vs the war time carry of the less protected sword (my guess, no guarantee on the accuracy of my history knowledge).
Historical battles weren't JUST confused melees, though. Professional soldiers fought in (usually) linear deployments, and were expected to hold formation. Room for maneuver would be limited, hands would still be the closest body part to the enemy in many situations, and there'd still be a lot of incentive to snipe at them. If one guy drops his spear because someone cut his fingers off, that can create a gap in the line and lead to the collapse of the whole formation.
Yeah but in a massed formation battle you’re not going to be sniping hands, only really if it presents itself as a viable target. Typically you’re working in tandem with your fellow soldiers and defending yourself from the other enemies around the one directly in front of you. You’re not necessarily sitting there waiting for a hand to present whereas in a one on one duel I’m sure you’re actively looking for it.
Glad to see you received the knife Matt. Actually got there faster than I thought it would. Awesome video. Great information as always.
That baskethilt is beautiful!
Thank you for this historical summary. From a practical and empirical point of view, it is evident that the first target is the hand and the armed arm. It prevents the opponent from attacking and is the closest target.
I can confirm that sword reach is relevant. I have a 3" scar on my left hand (I'm left handed) from a longsword, I was using a shortsword. Both with a simple crosshilt. Live blade, went clean through my hand... that was fun ;)
Never been in a real sword duel because I don't live in Narnia, however, I was in a lot of barehanded fights and fights with improvised weapons when I was young and you're right about the strategies being different. One on one you can take your time and use jabs and feints and fancy stuff. Several against one or in a group fight you try to put your opponents down as fast and hard as possible. You also hit people who aren't looking a lot . . . lol 😁
Interestingly the hand also gets accidentally hit often in gunfights as well. Presenting your pistol out in front of you often places it between your adversary and your center of mass causing the hand to get hit first. I remember it being brought of in a documentary on the OK corral gunfight in Tombstone.
I was going to bring this up. I’ve been involved in several investigations involving gun fights between police and armed suspects and I’ve observed a phenomenon that caused to me to look deeper into the subject.
The gun hand being in the way of a center mass aimed shot does not completely fit the pattern of shootings I’ve seen in some incidents involving hand shots.
It appears more that in some cases, despite training to shoot center mass, the focus on the immediately, ie the gun and the hand holding it, becomes so powerful that that area becomes the complete focus of attention resulting in shots subconsciously being directed at that area.
I think that likely applies to swords as a well.
@@sgtmac46 yup - target fixation on the perceived threat (the weapon).
@@sgtmac46
Very interesting. I never thought of this, but it makes perfect sense and it's obvious now that you mention it.
I remember fencing in high school. This one girl was brutal. She never went for the touch, she just whacked the crap out of my hand like she was wielding a saber instead of a foil. I got good at disarming with her. Not even really sure how I did it, but her sword hit the floor more than once.
And your point is? In foil fencing the hand is not a valid target. You could block any foil strike with your hand, take right-of-way, and score. This is why "fighting sports" are not the same as fighting. Foil fighting emphasizes the lethality of a stab wound in it's rules. And then promptly ignores the fact that if opponent A scores a torso stab on opponent B just before opponent B scores a stab on opponent A is a total fiction. Right-of-way rules apply to make sure that the person scoring the first touch wins. In reality, the two people would both be at risk of dying, no matter whether one hit even a second before the other. This is why "fighting sports" are not the same as actual fighting.
Really analogous to your observations on open-faced helmets. "Is the face a target that's going to be commonly hit?" "Yes." "Is it worth it covering it with protection?" "Maybe, maybe not."
Trade-offs, and educated guesswork.
So here's a random question about medieval battles that would be great to hear more about: members of the clergy in combat.
I was reading about Crecy on Wikipedia and saw this: "A disproportionate number of magnates featured among the slain on the French side, including one king (John of Bohemia), nine princes, ten counts, a duke, an archbishop and a bishop.[39][162]"
What were an archbishop and a bishop doing charging up a hill into combat? Was this normal? Did they die somehow by accident or away from the fighting? Or were they armored up and looking for a scrap?
Warrior clergymen are not unheard of, and in the spanish military at least It is not rare to have a priest for the troops, still today. Warmongering and religion are both strong in the gutfeeling department, so I find them natural companions
IIRC King John was blind and was led into battle...
It's often said there is a fine line between bravery and stupidity . . .
Bishop Absalon (1128-1202), founder of Copenhagen, counsellor to Valdemar 1 of Denmark, archbishop of Lund and one of the most important persons of political and religious power in Denmark at the time is depicted in a bronze statue from 1902 in one of the main squares of Copenhagen. Dressed in chainmail and helmet a la bayeux tapestry as an early medieval knight on horseback armed with a battleaxe. How historically acurate it is, idk, but: Yes, top clergy were present at the battlefields, and they meant business.
I am afraid this specific example is a mistake, which occured not in Wikipedia itself, but in books, which are referenced in this article. Kelly DeVries in his book "Infantry Warfare in the Early Fourteenth Century" mentiones among the casualities in the battle of Crecy "the archbishop of Xanten and the bishop of Noyon" (p.174), while Andrew Ayton in his book "The Battle of Crécy: Context and Significance" mentiones "the archbishop of Sens, the bishop of Noyon" (p.150). The same titles are in the book "The Wars of Edward III: Sources and Interpretations" of Clifford J. Rogers (p.131).
So, the Archdiocese of Xanten, as far as I know, never exsisted. The archbishop of Sens in 1346 was Guillaume II de Melun, and he remained archbishop there unteel his death in 1376 - so, obviously, he was not killed in the battle of Crecy. The bishop of Noyon in 1346 was Bernard Brion, also known as Bernard Le Brun. He became bishop of Auxerre in 1347 and died in 1349 - again, not in the battle of Crecy.
I am not a specialist in Medieval French history, and all this is a result of a quick Google and Wikipedia research, so I may be wrong. If I am not wrong, then I cannot tell for sure, why these historians made such a mistake. But in his book Clifford J. Rogers mentiones, that this list of french casualities is from the letter, written by english king Edward III after the battle, and it includes a few errors (for example, there is mentioned king of Majorca, who actually escaped). So, maybe this bishops were listed also by mistake.
It also does not mean, that bishops did not participate in battles in Middle Ages. For example, William de la Zouche, Archbishop of York, led a contingent of English troops at the Battle of Neville's Cross. Bishops were lords, they had not only lands, but also knights as vassals and peasant militias. And William de la Zouche in particular was also appointed a Warden of the Marches, clearly a military position. But I do not know, how common it was to a bishop to actually participate in combat.
In Peter Rhodan's Arturo Sandus series Arturo arms his infantry and cavalry with rapid-fire crossbows
Very effective against the Celtic tribes. Not so much against Roman Infantry but that is why Arturo always had a battle plan
I remember that Giganti( him again) mentions that against fighting multiple opponents one would do a so called cross cut that would cut directly into the swords with the intent of displacing the thrusts or any other attacks and injuring the hands(if possible). D'Alessandro also mentions this for the rippligiata he employs. Monte also mentions rising cuts to the hands with both the two handed sword and the pole axe and other weapons. Interestingly enough Joachim Meyer has similar cross cuts for his Rapier also with the intent of displacing the weapon but in his case hitting hands or the deep targets like you said.
I remember that ive read that in the battle of towton most injuries were to the hands and to the head. So my idea is hands were targeted if still further away but once it goes to the pell-mell or the real close quarter combat its like you said. But the blows to the hand in battle would be mainly done with polearms so not sure if that fits in the topic here.
EDIT: meaning that striking the hands could be done not only for offense but for defense as well while hoping to wound them in the process of defending against the opponents blade and hand.
Just my guess.
Smashing hands with a bill or halberd is absolutely a thing. You tend to try to trap the other guy's polearm downward (pressing the head to the ground) and then either your mate stabs him or you run your bill head up the staff of the polearm (usually by jabbing down towards the floor and "hopping" your bill head closer to the hand so as to keep his weapon suppressed) and force him to drop it by smashing his leading hand. Then unless the guy behind him is alert and gets his bill into play on the low line very quickly the guy with a smashed hand is likely to be impaled in short order.
@@chemistrykrang8065 ah interesting that makes sense, i remember something similar with meyers halberd where he feints and then cuts to the hands that are unguarded in a somewhat similar manner. Reminds me that an officer stated that men with two handed swords should use downright blows since they would cleave off limbs and hands.
One consideration is that, in dueling, it wasn't always to the death. First blood was often considered sufficient to "satisfy honor" while killing your opponent outright could lead to a messy feud with your opponents extended family. So hitting the hand or arm would provide the blood and reduce the chance or a killing wound.
What I could get from my experiences with "swordsmen" having many friends in the Living History is, that most injuries that they had taken duels and battles are headwounds and hand wounds.
i did backyard sparring with friends using the rawlings synthetic swords and our hands were constantly getting demolished more than any other part of our body, and it was very often unintentional. a lot of the time someone simply tried to parry an attack too late and ended up blocking it with their wrist instead of the sword.
we really should have bought some better hand protection, because even with padded gloves me and another person both ended up having fractured carpal bones. we were intentionally trying not to hit eachothers hands after a while, and it still happened all the time.
Upon Icepick grip on the dagger.
I trained Krav Maga style self defense for a short time. One of the most enlightening parts of the training where when they blasted heavy metal or other "chaotic" music and you had to run around in cirkels until you where dizzy and short of breath, then you tried to defend against an attacker or three. What I learned where how I reacted under an elevated level of stress, and it would give me a hint of what would work if I ended up in a real situation. I learned two things the "fancy tricks" goes out of the window.
And the only fairly advanced techniques that I used where the ones I first learned at the ages of 8 to 10 years and has been training since then.
Hand protection has actually been my main research topic. Hope to write my masters/PhD thesis on it.
This kind of video is really brilliant. I wish this was in some more permanent format than a RUclips video. This is real historical knowledge.
I agree with your assessment. From sparing experience, the hand is a small, fast target while the body and head are much "easier" to hit. In the wild swirl of mass combat, sniping a hand can be pretty tricky because you have to time it just right. Well, due to the increased number of variables, that perfect moment, I think, is harder to come by. Also... as you alluded to, the person right in front of you isn't your biggest threat. It's the chaos around you. I don't think I've ever been tagged by an opponent directly in front of me in group combat. It's always someone from the side. I think that leads into this idea... If someone opposite you is focused on another person and you have a "free" shot, why waste the opportunity on a hand attack when you can just drop them for good?
I am somewhat short, 1.64 M, in a duel with no armor I love aiming for the forearms and the hands with fast cuts from the fist maybe elbow, it is the closest target to me (usually) and they are the closest when you are lunching a counter atack, I have found that with good technice and timing there are many enemy atacks to my head and body that I can just counter by cutting their arms before they even reach to me.
If there is good armor in the way things get harder.
An illustration of Sun Tzu and Musashi principles of combat.
An additional thought about battlefield scenarios reducing hand sniping. In a battlefield you're likely to encounter lots of different weapons with different amounts of reach. I think with paired weapons, and actual stress of personal damage, it's natural for both opponents to come to a mutual agreement to stay at distance and "dance" until someone gets frustrated... because committing deeply is terrifying. In a battle with swords, spears, axes, knives, etc... many of those weapons simply can't sit back and snipe when paired against different weapons, thus creating a lot of incentive to get inside the other weapons ideal attack distance. Once you're already inside, are you going to target the hand... or the head? Then include the goal of "pushing the enemy out of a position", how often did things end up as a desperate rugby scrum with weapons, rather than delicate fencing? I can also see that often ending inside the distance where hand sniping is impractical.
After being in a couple of fights, I think historical people were broadly better at staying calm under pressure in real fights because they had probably been in a lot more violent situations and thus be better at staying calm.
It's interesting to see you compare sword combat to modern fist fighting. Awesome video
5 years of HEMA, got 3 broken fingers, all on accident. But the body and head injuries I had, like a broken rib, were caused by deliberate attacks. So totally agree with this
I e read somewhere that in the US, especially in winter, knives woulda during muggings indicate that in the North stabbing is more common but in the South cutting is more common. This is because of weather & clothing. Northern winters are colder thus more heave clothes in layers which makes cutting less effective.
My two cents about the topic as a 11-years-old viking reenactor with a finger that was broken quite some time ago : We target the hands everytime. We have specific fighting rules in duels and melee, and the hit area includes the hand, so a personnal good way of getting rid of my opponent is just waiting for an attack , blocking with the shield and sniping the hand/wrist. That's quite efficient and I use that a lot.
A related story or two: I usually wear protective gloves when training FMA and such. Because hands get whacked accidentally rather often.
I visited a martial arts school. Nobody was wearing groin protection during sparring because groin hits were illegal. And I saw at least a dozen accidents occur.
So, things happen. :)
A protective hilt is wonderful, especially if one doesn't have time to get the dueling gloves on. Plus,iy makes a wonderful surface for striking with.
Interesting subject. Certainly glad you backed of after the intro mostly.
13:10 very small detail, but that I loved how smooth that rotation of the rondel was.
In modern Sabre fencing you will find that attacks at the hand aren’t a great percentage play - the hand itself can also readily be moved away, in addition to the protection of guard or parry - yes, attacks to the wrist do occur, mostly when the opportunity presents itself, but much more often used as a counter attack. So it comes down to the balance between initiative and caution - if it’s a duel you may well attack at the hand as a feint, draw the counter, in order to bind and counter the counter (now you’re fencing Epee, which was of course invented for practicing for the duel). If involved in a melee, you are going to be vulnerable if you attack and miss, so I totally agree with your discussion regarding psychology.
I regret I could only give one like as there were many great points and I laughed more than a few times. You kept the video fun and engaging throughout thanks for sharing the good info
absolutely love matt's explanations! great vid as always
By the way, in DA Kinsley I also read a few colourful accounts of the interesting side-utility of basket-hilted weapons. Was the blade heavily damaged (or lost due to an encounter with something) the lasting basket-hilt was used as a mailed fist!
I’m curious to what extent basket hilts we’re thought of as offensive as well as defensive? Is it a given that they can be used to punch with?
@@SLiMBiLT Its probably case to case - not all baskets are uniformly strong ;-) But in those few cases I "cited" it was a last-ditch effort and was probably seen as that. But boxing (in the 19th-century meaning, could have helped.
Hey Matt, I think the most fundamental reason why medieval swords had simple cruciform hilts, and not the more complex hilt designs which were developed later, might be something you've completely overlooked. You see, the length of the crossguard of a medieval sword, together with the sharp, 90 degree angle between the crossguard and the blade, make it relatively easy to catch your opponent's blade between your own blade and crossguard, and then hold your opponent's blade relatively securely thereby. However, if your sword has a more complex hilt, such as is seen on rapiers, or on Elizabethan backswords, certain parts of that more complex hilt can get in the way of your opponent's blade and thereby prevent your opponent's blade from getting caught as effectively between your own blade and crossguard. Consequently, if you then try to deliver a thrust from the bind, as is shown in the first technique of Johannes Leckuchner's messer fencing treatise, the fact that you have a more complex, protective hilt, such as a rapier hilt, can potentially make it more likely that your opponent's blade will accidentally slip off of your hilt, and that you will then accidentally impale yourself on your opponent's sword as you step forward to stab your opponent. In contrast, with a simple cruciform hilt, there's less material in the way to prevent your opponent's blade from getting stuck between your blade and crossguard. Hence when you bind against your opponent's blade, you can potentially control your opponent's blade more surely, and therefore can more safely close the distance between yourself and your opponent, in order to wound your opponent with your own sword. This is my suspicion. I was wondering if you could confirm it.
This is interesting, but your argument applies to all fencing, and doesn't explain why people did move to basket hilts later on.
I've noticed when I lightsaber spar my friends I usually am taking out their hands way more than doing body shots, so good to know that hand shots are common.
I have a experience I can add to this conversation. Fifteen years ago when I was in high school, I was fighting saber in a fencing tournament in San Diego. I got matched up with a opponent that decided to be a serious ass. I scored a few hits on him without him being able score back to try and even the score. He decided at this point to punch me in the face full force with the bell guard/basket hilt which is wholly illegal in ALL forms of fencing and it's one of the most commonly known official rules.
It is as common knowledge as looks both ways before you cross the street, but I digress. The referee reset us and did not given my opponent a point but also did not penalize him for the punch. We started the next bout and he punched me in the face again. The referee again tried to reset us without calling a penalty against my opponent.
I stopped the match and got in his face about it while I sent my dad to go grab the tournament officials. They looked at the video in front of the Ref. and reminded him that he HAD to call a penalty whenever that sort of thing happened. They walked away after saying that could not happen again to both the Ref. and my opponent. We restarted the match with our current scores and almost immediately my opponent tried to punch me again and missed, and referee said nothing.
So I decided to put an end to these shenanigans myself. My opponent advanced towards me while pulling his arm back for his strike, and I just held the tip of my sword out where I knew his arm was going to travel. He rammed his own arm into the sword tip scoring me a point. We reset our positions and started again. We exchange a few blows and parries and then he tried to punch me again and I stabbed again. Not scoring a point this time though since the tip had got caught in the fold of the glove's leather hand and the metal lame'. It dug pretty deep into the glove, he recoiled while shaking his hand and then rubbing his wrist. We reset once again, then began the bout. He was angry this time and charged me fast to try and get a lungeing punch at me. I thrust at his arm with a lunge as fast as I could to keep from being hit. The saber's tip had connected with his wrist again, this time there was no point scored but a big yowl of pain. My saber was almost pulled out of my hand as my opponent turned away while dropping his sword. The saber tip had accidentally gone through the hole in the glove where the wire goes through to connect with the sword and hit him in the wrist directly! There was no penetration of the skin, but it hurt him like an S.O.B. He was much more hesitant and docile the rest of the match which I won easily. Just a fun memory. 😎⚔
Thanks so much, great video. EXCEPT.... I think the video title should be "How often were HANDS TARGETED in real SWORD FIGHTING?"
I kept waiting for the actual answer of "how often are they hit" and didn't get much other than "they are/were definitely hit."
In any case, it's still a very cool video and I learned a lot!
Do swordfighting classes sometime you will find out they are hit quite often actually especially without gauntlets or a basket hilt. The crucifix hilt may protect maybe barely most hand strikes but hands are the closest target and are a very likely target in fighting. If it is armored nearly all the way around I would think then they would pick another target unless it is for sport that awards points for hitting it anyways. So I would say that is why they added more hand protection because they noticed hands were being hit a lot. I wish Matt Easton would have clearly answered this question as well. In my experience I do swordfighting and it awards more points for chest or head because generally those would do more damage. But even then hand strikes are so common because they are so easy to get and you don't have to commit so much to get hit in the head or chest and you can be pretty far away and get them.
I've always wondered this since I was a kid. Great video, thank you
There is a seemingly unrelated youtube video about a very skilled player of DCS Black Shark (basiclly the newest combat flight sim). The video author did a series of 1v1 duels with a French fighter pilot, and actually managed to win a few times. However, the thing that the video author noticed was that his victories came very slowly after long turning fights, where as the real fighter pilot won EXTREMELY quickly. The author repeatedly commented on how aggressive the fighter pilot was, and how that either resulted in his winning in a few seconds or in a knife fight that could go either way. I think that's a real world example of "win fast when fighting a group" as a dictum from an extremely fast and high threat environment.
In Richard Mardsen's book on Polish Sabre, he made it sound like the hand was a popular target with the Poles.
off hand, I enjoyed this video; thanks!
Thank you for this video as a follow up from the hand guard video as this does help clear up some confusion about it that i'd had.
Thanks for the video ⚔️
In the SCA we never intentionally target hands but we still use big chunky cup hilts because hands are squishy and are often hit accidentally
I did chinese a traditional kung-fu, with a guy who is now a Shaolin Temple Grandmaster, when I started weapon training first thing I got taught was cheap shot to the hand :D
Well done....thank you!
This is actually very well explained and anyone that fences knows how common hand hits are, whether intentional or accidental. The more experienced you become the better your hand defense but against less experienced fencers the hands are prime real estate for an easy target.
Also I think it should be noted that people generally don't want to die. You mentioned the psychology of a fight, well, if you lose a few fingers, function in a hand or just the whole hand entirely that will usually deter most from continuing the duel. So yes, hands were most certainly targeted and hand sniping was an integral part of fencing, primarily in duels.
Also it should be noted that any target is a target and any wound to your opponent is an advantage for you. The goal, first and foremost, is to survive and end the fight as quickly as possible, doesn't really matter what gets you there.
You should build a vertical lazy susan for holding multiple weapons during a video, so you can spin the wheel back and forth to highlight different weapons.
Modern Pub Fights... Now that sounds like a good request for a video!
I really would like a video that goes into the laws of carrying weapons in different periods and parts of Europe.
Mushashi in Book of the Five Rings mentions targeting the hands in several passages, either as part of a primary attack, or as one redirects their cut due to a block or feint.
I was a solid university fencer, I dabbled in live role play and pretty much exclusively sniped hands as I was so much faster and more precise than them. It was also satisfying way to demonstrate the value of fencing training as a lot of them had no small measure of contempt for fencing.
Another great vid. I find it interesting as the follow on to the hand guard video. One aspect of the basket hilt/guard formation on swords I find particularly intriguing is their value as a punching weapon/close in knuckle-duster/eye gouger tool. You touch on it in the video where an opponent might close in if they feel their fencing might be lacking. I do feel that the guards (even a cross guard - eye pokes!) are great aids for improvisation when things get very close up or attempts are made to bind up blades.
I remember slap-parrying someone’s foam blade in practice and he screamed out in pain from the impact and dropped his practice sword. It made me wonder how often that ever happened in real combat.
Another well thought out video, Matt. I agree with your main points but feel that you could have made more of the question of the skill/training. In my many decades of fencing and sword martial art sparring, I have noticed that beginners very seldom attack their opponent's hands. This is in part because they lack the training in hitting this small and rapidly moving target. I also think that without training focussing on hand attacks, beginners generally fail to recognise the hand as a target, focusing instead on closing the distance and attacking their opponent's centre mass. This is also relevant to your point about battlefield fighting as the majority of soldiers in most periods were not highly trained swordsmen.
Hi Matt, would like to see a video on Kukri fighting techniques and accounts of their use in battle.
I always think of the hands as the first target because they’re the closest and very critical. And the head and the primary target to end the fight. If I were in a real duel I think I’d go for the hand to disarm or at least create an opening for a head strike.
I see others have noted the same thing, in a group fight a lot of the tactics immediately become keeping with your team and trying to isolate someone from the other team. In those situations the hands are not the closest targets. Additionally tackling someone is a massive advantage, because your friend gets a free shot on their face while their hands are occupied with the takedown but also a risk if one of their friends is in position to do the same.
As a lefty, and with experience in fencing (not HEMA), hand hits were very common because I was always arm-to-arm with my opponent.
There’s a severed hand in Norwich Castle museum. It was lost in a duel and the guy kept his own hand and it mummified. It is about 75% of a hand iirc, showing the cut angle!
It's interesting you mention Manciolino because a few of his illustrations do show a cruciform hilted sword with no rings.
As a former stick 'sword' fighting champion of a small town with a total of 4 other children to fight against. Hand hits, both intentional and accidental are indeed quite common and a valid strike if you want to win.
Armored gloves with cross hilt evolves into leather glove or naked hand with basket hilt that can also pull the trigger of a pistol or rifle, hard to do wearing platemail glove
I know a lil from my own experiences the Pi cut in chInese styles of sword fencing(A short percussive cut usually done in a overhand motion) is one of the quickest most practical ways to catch a disarm especially with a saber which due to its forward weighed tip will maim the opponent if unarmored. Its esp quick in a parry 3 repost situation with the point down.
Hand wounds build character! On a serious note hand wounds can be utterly life changing even with modern prosthesis.
Notifications Squad, mates
Great vid as usual - very interesting.
I may have had the odd melee scuffle / with and against groups when I was a young tearaway....as others have said - its feints and jabs when you're one on one.
In a melee, its anything goes - usually going for the big hits (and being hit by the big hits) 🤣
I imagine pre firearm battles were terrifying, shocking and visceral.....fight or flight taking over, adrenaline pumping, nuance out the window in favour of brute force.
Great lot of uploads recently!
Enjoyed it!
I have a feeling that this gets a lot of
”I MEANT to do that!”
Thrown into the recounting.
Great video! I would think in a one on one you have, as you said, the time and focus to target more specific and in the case of the hands, smaller targets on your opponent. Whereas in a battle while its true that you might go for the most disabling strike/target - you might also consider that, in the absence of time to be careful and strategic, you might also simply go for the biggest target as well - i.e. someone's torso etc or just the main part of the body which could include the head or the thighs/legs etc. I would imagine the more accomplished you are technically, the more likely you'd be able to still target more specific areas like the hands in a bigger fight if you wanted to - but again, as you said it is probably still best to go for areas that are more immediately disabling and so your ability to still specifically target might be better spent on the neck or inside of the leg to get a wound that bleeds heavily and perhaps isnt covered by as much protection etc.
I think non-fencers would be amazed at how often your strike or your opponent's hits the guard
I agree, I notice I tend to attack the hand and wrist when I'm sparring with a single opponent, whereas when I spar with multiple opponents I tend to attack larger, more incapacitating targets.
The Battle of Mactan…
Lapu Lapu used Kali to defeat Magellan (many are familiar with it as practiced by Doug “It Will Kiiiill” Marcaida, from Forged in Fire).
The cardinal rule of Kali is to attack the part of your opponent closest to you, often the hand or foot.
Also, one of the primary principles of Kali is that you only need to make it so that your opponent cannot continue to fight. When in a large scale battle situation, this becomes paramount… it’s more efficient, takes less effort.
Often, due to heavier protection in vulnerable areas, it is not so easy to score a “deep” blow to a vital part of the head or torso. To incapacitate your opponent (by damaging their arm or leg) becomes a much easier prospect by comparison.
A quote from what happened to Magellan during the battle:
“In the struggle, he was wounded in the arm with a spear and in the leg by a large native sword (likely a kampilan).”
Have you thought about doing a video on fast draw techniques & it's effect on sword design historically? It influenced the development of swords like the Chisa Katana, the Cossack Saber/Shaska & others. Just thought it might be interesting.
I agree with all of that with one caviat... In my own personal experience, I find that accidental hand targeting by people whom are learning fencing (yes, this classifies as the one on one dueling context) are much more prevalent because the nature is to watch the hand whereas the training is to watch the shoulder or blade in some fencing schools
Superdry? More like Superbuff. Those forearms could cut throught a granite pillar with a feather.
Funny to hear a master of swords reference the three musketeers. Priceless.
Very interesting.
My understanding of Polish Sabre, the hand was a popular target in dueling.
from my experience in modern sports fencing, wich comes from the french duel to first blood, it feels like the hand or arm are the targets wich are easiest to hit (being left handed) without even being in a distance where the opponent would counter attack, thinking the distance was save. This might come from the rules in modern fencing, but taking a hand-snipe seems to have a good ammount of safety for a "win" in case of first blood. not much action is needed, but a fine observation of the opponents positure.
Also a basket hilt or even a simple knuckle bow makes it that much easier to hold onto your sword and not have it knocked out of your hand.
Unsurprisingly finger ring has always been very popular...especially with the fair ladies...
When I look at knuckle bows I see many different variations when analyzing the strength of them.
From delicate brass bows to very stout heavy steel bows.
Do you think the delicate ones were primarily for aiding grip retention quality’s and the medium strength bows were for hand defence form others blades , and finally the stout heavy steel bows were intended for protecting the hand like brass knuckles wile bashing a face or visor in.
3 uses for the bow guard. Some covered all three others two and some just one.
What do you make of this thought Matt ?
"Oh, hand wound aren't that..."
Star Wars characters: "go on, I want to listen to this"
According to Talhoffer, hands were occasionally completely severed!
Edit: And now I see that you cover that in your video!😂
Are you sure that wasn't a literary....hook?
I've found very few rapier sources, even those that depict or describe swept hits as opposed to a dish/cup, etc that advocate striking the hand itself. I surmise that's because extending an attack directly toward the opponent's forte is a very high risk play. Slightly deeper targeting of the forearm or bicep, where the line of the attack can still interpose their debole is much more common.
hi matt
how would sword design have changed if firearms had never been invented?
I'd expect that autopsies of the mass burials from medieval battles (Towton, Wisby, etc.) would have some stats on hand/arm wounds among the combatants.
I would be very interested to see some more video of folks who have experience and practice in fighting in dueling/1:1 contexts doing small group fights across an area. Maybe even not massed up, but just to see how fighters react to a brawl - do they naturally clump together or start trying to coordinate, or are they dueling with a friend dueling the second assailant trying to hit them from the side?
There's plenty of fencing/boxing/self defense content on 1:1, but not so much on "You and your friend need to quickly punch your way out of this brawl."
Good topic.
Clergy participating in battle also occurred during the American Civil War. CSA Lieutenant General Leonidas Polk was a bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana. He was killed in action while performing a reconnaissance of federal positions near Marietta, GA June,1864.
Risk v Reward definitely plays a huge part in target selection. a hand is a low risk, high reward target, but it's also a relatively small moving target. In a one on one fight with decent distance, it's an ideal point to strike. It's accessible, even if it is somewhat hard to hit, and if it doesn't end the fight, a solid hand hit will severely hamper an opponent for a follow up. You don't lose much if you miss, you don't really have to put yourself into more danger to get a shot at it. In massed melee, the math changes. Your avenues of attack and defense are hampered by both friend and foe while the number of potential threats and the directions they come from grows exponentially. You need to take whatever shot you can get that will tilt the odds in your favor and you don't have the time or narrowness of attention to deliberately target something as small as a hand. Your attention is going to be on tracking multiple threats by their center of mass. heads and torsos are the things that are easiest to visually "lock on" to, so they're going to be prioritized.
The techiniques described in Heyho Kadensho (Life giving sword) from Yagyu Shin Kage Ryu often advise to cut the wrist of the enemy .
I’m a filthy hand sniper and I’m proud !
🤮🤮🤮
People are just mad that they suck at protecting their hands.