Hank Reinhardt's The Book of the Sword

by Hank Reinhardt

  The trick of the drawcut is much the same as with the katana. The cut is made, and while the blade is in motion, the wrist is firm, and the blade is drawn back toward the body. The snap cut is quite useful with the single-handed sword. Using it, a blow with considerable power can be generated. As with any full power cut, the cut draws on the power of the body as well as that of the arm. As the arm descends, just before the blade makes contact, the wrist is snapped forward. This extra speed generates a surprising amount of force, and its use can enable you to make a strong cut using only the force of the arm and shoulder.

  There is another aspect that has to be mentioned. Anytime you are making a strong cut at a specific object, your concentration should be on cutting past the object. It is easy to concentrate on the object, and what usually happens is that your arm stops close to the surface. But if you look past the object, you will cut through it. This is just like throwing a punch—it is thrown through the opponent.

  This section is not designed to be an end-all treatise on cutting. Hopefully, it will give you something of the basics. You can practice on your own, and then if you so desire, seek some professional instruction.

  Suggestions for further reading from Hank:

  Hoyland, Robert G. and Brian Gilmour, Medieval Islamic Swords and Swordmaking: Kindi's Treatise "On Swords and their kinds" (edition, translation and commentary). The E.J.W. Gibb Memorial Trust, Oxford, 2006.

  Suggestions for further reading from the editors:

  Anglo, Sydney, The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe. Yale University Press, New Haven, 2000.

  Waldman, John, Hafted Weapons of Medieval and Renaissance Europe. Brill Academic Publishers, 2005.

  Williams, Alan, The Knight and the Blast Furnace: A History of the Metallurgy of Armour in the Middle Ages & and the Early Modern Period. Brill Academic Publishers, 2003.

  [1] I used to work as a framer back in the day, and all the guys on my crew (including myself) could drive a 2-1/2 inch spike home with one hit of the hammer. It took very good timing—you held the spike with your off hand, and swung the hammer, letting go at the precise moment (hence the good timing). Before the spike fell over, you drove it home with a single blow. A framer's hammer has a long handle, so centrifugal force did most of the work, but dexterity and timing was crucial. Speed was important because time was money for the contractor, so using this method, we could pound a dozen nails in as many seconds. I'm proud to say that I never once hit my hand with my hammer. This skill actually translated well when I became an armorer; my dexterity was developed to the point where I can hit the same spot the size of a pinhead a hundred times in a hundred tries. —Peter Fuller

  [2]Stone, George Cameron, A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor. Jack Brussel, Publisher, New York, 1961.

  14: Fighting with the Sword

  Although I cannot imagine being interested in swords without also being interested in the combat potential of each weapon, some people feel differently. In a conversation with Ewart Oakeshott, he mentioned a well known sword authority (who shall remain nameless) who commented that he wasn't interested in the blades of swords at all, but only in their hilts! This was someone who had held many old and splendid blades in his hands, and who never once thought of them as weapons? Now, I do believe that he said it, I just don't think that he meant it. Possibly he was embarrassed that a man of his standing still held a sword and thought of "Raw, Red War!" After all, war isn't considered a pleasant subject and these days it is thought crass to say you find the subject interesting or exciting.

  But like it or not, good, bad, but never indifferent, swords were weapons, made for young men to use when killing other young men. No matter what is thought, no matter what euphemisms are used, this is the basic fact. They are weapons, and how they could be used as weapons depends on many things.

  It is undoubtedly presumptuous and may even be insolent for me to write on fighting with the sword. I have never led a charge of cavalry, or a Viking raid on England, nor stood in the front ranks of a Roman legion. I never stood in a shield wall screaming my defiance at the enemy or, I might blushingly admit, never fought a duel with either katana or rapier. But I did grow up in the 1940s and '50s, when schoolyard fights and barroom brawls were considered part of growing up, and I've had my share of those types of encounters.

  And I have over the years played at fighting with a large number of people. In the late 1960s I was lucky enough to locate some other sword nuts who lived close by, and we spent a lot of time sparring and getting bruised. There was time spent in the Society for Creative Anachronism, as well as studying various fight manuals from Europe, Japan and China. Over the intervening years this research has taken many forms. I have cut into pork shoulder bones, armor of all types, other swords, tatami mats, newspapers, and many more items. In addition, I've studied a lot of literary material, medieval and Viking sagas, archeological reports, and spoken with curators, police officers and wound experts.

  So I do have some firm opinions regarding swords and sword use. The strongest is very simple. There are no experts in this field. It is simply too varied, with too many different types of swords, too many geographical areas, and entirely too much of a time frame in which these weapons were used. I am not an expert by any means, and what follows are my own opinions.

  How well this minor amount of knowledge relates to fighting with swords it is difficult to say. Many of the things you will find in this section will apply to real sword fights with real weapons and with real serious intent to harm. But it also applies to many other types of contests, not only physical, but mental as well.

  But one thing it has taught me is that in actual combat, things do not go as predicted in manuals and instructional books. Even today, what happens in a barroom brawl is not quite the same as what occurs in the dojo. It has often been said that all battle plans go astray the moment the first shot is fired, and I believe that is true in all forms of combat.

  There is something else that must be emphasized. A full scale battle was completely different than a planned duel, or a chance encounter, or even being attacked by footpads. And each encounter would always be different from any other encounter. Whether you were an English longbow man, a Swiss pikeman, a samurai or a French knight, whether you had fought in battle once or twice before, or if this was your fifth or sixth encounter, each battle was different.

  This is also true for individual duels; each was an encounter within itself, and while experience is always helpful, what worked in the past might not work now.

  In today's society there is an unconscious assumption that all people are the same. There is also the belief that all men feel and think as we do, with the same basic values. This is simply not true. For an example, how many men, having accidentally committed a severe breach of etiquette, would commit suicide as a way of expiation? None in our current society, but it was quite common in medieval Japan.

  We live in a society that places a high value on human life, but sadly places very little value on the concept of honor. In the past a man would die to uphold his honor, and now honor is considered a rather outmoded concept. To say that you would rather die on your feet than live on your knees is a comment that brings out snickers in many sections of our society.

  But this book isn't about social ills or changes, it's about swords. I do feel that it is very important to understand that what is considered proper today does not apply to other times and places.

  I have often been asked about how you fight with swords. Usually I try to answer this question by asking what sword they are talking about and in what context. By the time they puzzle out what they want to know, I'm no longer around. It isn't that I am reluctant to talk about the use of swords, or to share what little knowledge I may have, but rather many persons do not actually know what they are asking.

  It should also be noted that most of this section will deal with combat between individuals. Actual battles are another thing entirely. As strategy may w
in a war, tactics may win a battle. This section is not about either. In my opinion each battle was a thing unto itself. Even those that appear similar, such as the battles of Cannae and Adrianople, are different. In each the Romans were surrounded and crushed together so tightly they were unable to use their weapons, and many actually smothered to death. If a time traveler could actually take part in each battle he would find that each had its own flavor, if you will, each its own feel and ambience. Of course this is also true of individual encounters. No two will ever be exactly alike; if they were, they would be easy to prepare for.

  Another facet that has to be mentioned is the difference between real combat and simple contests. Although in the past "swordplay" and "sword fighting" meant the same thing; in this chapter I will be using them differently. "Swordplay" means just what it says, play with swords. There is a vast difference between the play and fighting. Since it is highly unlikely that any of us will ever have to actually fight with swords we can only guess at the effectiveness of the training.

  Miyamoto Musashi's excellent Book of Five Rings deals with many things, but the essence of the book can be distilled down to a simple phrase, "The object is to cut your enemy." Of course Musashi is not the only one to set this out. All of the European masters have said the same thing. Your object is to win. While this is true in war, in contests there are rules. These rules are there for many reasons, but when you enter into these contests, you have agreed to play by the rules. If you dislike them, then you have two options: you can lobby to have them changed, or you cannot play. To play and try to "game" the system or to circumvent the rules or to actually cheat is, in my opinion, dishonorable. In a contest I would rather lose with honor than win by cheating. However, in actual combat I can assure you that I would do whatever I can to make sure that I walk away while my enemy doesn't.

  Now kind reader, if you will put up with my long winded comments, I will try to tell you some things that I know, some things that I suspect, and then you can figure out what you may have garnered from this and your own experiences.

  PHYSICAL CONDITIONING FOR SWORDPLAY

  Obviously physical condition is important, but in certain circumstances that pales beside the need to just have a physical body there. An example is the Battle of Visby, a battle that has already shown up in this book. Many of the skeletons unearthed were of older people, and many had been crippled in the past, either by disease, accident or combat. But when the Danes invaded, the city needed all the help it could get, and so they called on everyone who could bear a weapon. A lot of the skeletons were of young men, and this was probably their first, and last, combat.

  Reproduction Viking sword. HRC19.

  We consider physical conditioning very important and there are countless gyms and dojos in this country promoting it. And well they should, for this is very important to your physical well being. But consider why they have to. We have cars, TV, radio, movies, enormous quantities of food, and huge amounts of leisure time to enjoy all of these "benefits" of this society. After all, we only work about 40 hours per week, and in some countries, it is only 35–37 hours per week.

  But before the onset of the industrial revolution these benefits were not available. You walked or rode a horse. A few of the very wealthy rode in carriages, but they too had to walk. In short, these people may have suffered from more diseases and injuries than we do, but for overall condition, the ability to keep going, to suffer hardships and continue and yet still survive, they were much stronger and tougher than we are. I can remember when I was young, and a product of the city. Even though I was something of an athlete, wrestling, running, lifting weights, boxing, and so on, there were young farm boys who had not done any exercises but were at least as tough and strong, and quite formidable.

  Consider this. Archery is a sport that I dearly love. (Regrettably, I am also lousy at it.) In my youth I shot a heavy bow, an 86-pound Kodiac Magnum from Bear. I was the only one I knew who could pull it. Today many shoot "heavy" bows, compound bows with draw weights of 90 and 100 pounds, yet with holding weights of only 45–50 pounds.

  Consider the bows taken from the Mary Rose (a ship of Henry VIII that was sunk in 1545, and recovered several years ago). Experts went over the bows, and while there were a few that drew only about 80 pounds, many had draw weights of about 125 pounds, and one or two whose estimated draw weights were about 160 pounds. The Mongol bows are believed to have draw weights quite similar to these. Certainly the recurve will outshoot a longbow pound for pound in draw weights. Some scientific tests done about twenty years ago showed that a recurved composite bow of the type used by the horse archers of Central Asia can discharge an arrow roughly 20 percent faster than a longbow of the same draw weight. The recurve also has a slight mechanical advantage due to the angle of the string to the nock. This makes it somewhat easier to draw.

  Antique German stiletto circa 1600, 15 inches overall length. HRC35.

  Now, I am aware that these archers learned their craft from an early age. But it also reflects the fact that in their society they were merely archers, and not noted strong men.

  But now back to combat with swords and other hand weapons.

  As has been stated elsewhere in this book, the Icelandic sagas are an excellent source of information for fighting with sword and shield and combat in general. One thing that I found interesting is the number of encounters between groups of men. More often than not they talk of several people fighting, with men from the opposing sides merely looking on. Then suddenly one will start to fight, while another, having severely wounded or even killed his opponent will take a break. Rarely do we hear of everyone fighting at one time. I found this curious until a TV documentary on gang fights in various parts of the country reminded me of my own youth, when I witnessed several fights between groups. They were the same as was shown on TV, and the same as many of the fights described in the sagas.

  Several guys would be fighting, while others looked on. Then one would jump in, beat on someone, then jump back out of the fight, posture a bit, and sometimes go back in, and others just wait. It also looked a great deal like chimps involved in a raid, particularly the posturing.

  In Njal's Saga—there were lots of fights recorded in Njal's Saga—Gunnar, Hjort and Kolskegg are involved in such a melee. They are attacked by a group of men led by Starkad. Gunnar defends himself with his bow and kills several from a distance when Starkad decides that if they stay within range of that bow they are in deep trouble, so they press the attack quickly. Then Gunnar drops his bow, and grabs a sword and halberd. Kolskegg was armed with sword and shield. Bork and Thorkel ran toward them. Bork swung at Gunnar, who parried so hard with his halberd that the sword flew from Bork's grasp. Then Gunnar pivoted and cut Thorkel on the neck with his sword so hard that he cut Thorkel's head off. Kol Egilsson said, "Let's attack Kolskegg," and lunged at him with a spear. Kolskegg had just killed somebody and was caught off guard. The spear hit the outside of Kolskegg's thigh and cut it deeply. Kolskegg whirled, swung his sword and cut off Kol's leg. "Did that one handed?" asked Kol. "That's what I get for not having my shield with me," he continued, as he stood on one leg, looking down at the stump. "It's just like you think, the leg's off," was the reply from Kolskegg.

  When Egil, Kol's father, saw his son die, he then attacked Gunnar. Gunnar countered with his halberd, stuck it through Egil's stomach and threw him into the river. Thorir, an Easterner (i.e. Norwegian), had been standing somewhat idly by and Starkad called him a coward. This angered him. He jumped up and attacked Hjort (who had already killed two men), stabbing him in the chest, which killed him instantly. Gunnar saw this and attacked the Easterner. With one swipe of his halberd Gunnar cut him in two at the waist. Then Gunnar threw the halberd at Bork, sending it right through him and pinning him to the ground. Kolskegg cut off Egilsson's head and then Gunnar sliced off Ottar Egilsson's forearm. All in all, not a good fight to even be standing around near.

  Reproduction spetum. HRC253.

  Altho
ugh I have no way of proving this, I feel that in many battles much the same thing took place. You would fight in the line, then slip back and take a break before continuing the conflict. This is provided that your line is holding; once it broke, most ran like hell. Wasn't a question of cowardice, more like running from a dam that has broken.

  Single combat is where skill is the most important. And we will deal with the physical requirement first. Specific conditioning is something that must be left up to the individuals and to their choice of weapons. What I have heard from the many people I have talked to over the years is that most want to be proficient with many types of swords, daggers, staff weapons and spears. Obviously sparring and practicing with these weapons is a necessity, and this will also help somewhat in the cardio conditioning, and a small amount in the muscle conditioning. But more is needed in both aerobic and anaerobic conditioning.

  For the modern practitioner of swordplay, a strong heart and lungs is a must. Being able to move quickly on your feet is also a plus, and these can both be attained by various exercises. Doing the type of swordplay you enjoy is certainly one of the ways you can increase your endurance. However, this should be supplemented by running, stair climbing, duck walks or even the old football exercise of high stepping through squares. Cardiovascular conditioning has another advantage—it's also healthy.

  Strong wrists and forearms are also needed. The ability to snap the sword forward quickly is valuable. While this does not require great physical strength, snapping the sword forward and then losing it because your hands are not strong enough to hold it is downright embarrassing. In the old days it could get you killed, today it will only get you snickers that are ineffectively hidden.