HEMA/Historical Warfare v. 1 "Strike in and hasten forth; rush to, let it hit, or go by."
422 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sunkite;47802712]I'm back from the medieval fair, bitches!
Why did none of you post in the thread? For shame.
It was a great experience working at the fair, but holy fuck are people idiots. We left with some really stressed horses since people cant read or use common sense.
At least I found and bought a awesome Bascinet I can use for jousting![/QUOTE]
lol what happened with the horses?
good luck with your jousting. how much did the bascinet cost btw? i'm also curious if it's a mass produced helm or just something made from a local armourer. good equipment for sport is always important but for something like jousting, i always think it's something you can't cut corners with. also, you should share pics of the fair and your new helm!
personally i can't wait to get rid of my bascinet lol.
[editline]26th May 2015[/editline]
also a cool pic of lochac (australia)'s ex-king
[t]https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/11058557_10155436675770422_6267189545058361513_n.jpg?oh=5ec2770341d77dd814faab3f8d6398ca&oe=560126A1&__gda__=1438809783_805d5ad31b043cf2753ac05f55df7df4[/t]
[QUOTE=kimchimafia;47804483]lol what happened with the horses?
good luck with your jousting. how much did the bascinet cost btw? i'm also curious if it's a mass produced helm or just something made from a local armourer. good equipment for sport is always important but for something like jousting, i always think it's something you can't cut corners with. also, you should share pics of the fair and your new helm!
personally i can't wait to get rid of my bascinet lol.
[editline]26th May 2015[/editline]
also a cool pic of lochac (australia)'s ex-king
[t]https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/11058557_10155436675770422_6267189545058361513_n.jpg?oh=5ec2770341d77dd814faab3f8d6398ca&oe=560126A1&__gda__=1438809783_805d5ad31b043cf2753ac05f55df7df4[/t][/QUOTE]
People who cant read tried to feed/touch the horses when they wanted to be left alone.
Staff decided to party right next to them. Meaning they got no sleep.
Said staff got drunk and tried to get in to the horses. Resulting in my tutor running around in his underwear with a sword chasing people away around 3 AM.
Thank you. The plan is that I will join the championship at the fair next year.
Since my tutor has a shitload of connections and knew the guys, I got it a bit cheaper.
They wanted 240$ for it but I got it for 210$.
Also bought a helm cap and a winged spear tip for HEMA from them.
This fair has robbed me of a load of money. Haha.
The helmet is made by their own smith, not mass produced. It has been made with HEMA, BoTN and Jousting in mind.
And yes. Safety equipment is absolutely important when you are going 80km/h and about to get hit with a big stick.
That would require a whole lot of effort I simply can't be bothered to do right now. Haha. I might share some pictures with you guys from Facebook later though.
Why would you get rid of your bascinet? Bad quality or do you dislike the design? Personally, I think bascinets are the coolest helmets ever.
that's a pretty damn good price for the helm, especially if it has all that hema/botn/jousting stuff in mind. shittier helms often go for higher here and they're generally unsafe to use in any combat sport. and they don't even look good.
as for my bascinet, i'd say it's a mixture of both quality and design. it protects my head in the game of sca well but there's a lot of things i'm not very happy with. it's too tailored for the sca so it's over-sized, disproportional compared to historical examples and it has a fixed bar grill. i'd also want to make the transition to a more historical full closed helmet sooner rather than later.
and i guess it's also because it's probably the most common helm you can find in the sca and i'm not fond to how it distributes its weight and the crappy vision a hounskull visor can give it. and the safety requirements of the sca makes you to take a few but minor alterations to the bascinet so that the visor can remain locked in place. also the bascinet pretty much forces me to have a late 14th-early 15th century kit. i'd much rather focus on the late 16th century.
while i really like the look of the bascinet, i'm more of a fan of the later close helms and armets tbh. the way those helms wrap around your head and actually lock in place by either leather strapping, spring pins and/or hooks is a lot more comfortable imo. takes the weight off the top of your head and neck. also visor slits can get pretty damn historically close to the eyes too so that's always a plus, especially in the context of foot combat.
[QUOTE=kimchimafia;47806326]that's a pretty damn good price for the helm, especially if it has all that hema/botn/jousting stuff in mind. shittier helms often go for higher here and they're generally unsafe to use in any combat sport. and they don't even look good.
as for my bascinet, i'd say it's a mixture of both quality and design. it protects my head in the game of sca well but there's a lot of things i'm not very happy with. it's too tailored for the sca so it's over-sized, disproportional compared to historical examples and it has a fixed bar grill. i'd also want to make the transition to a more historical full closed helmet sooner rather than later.
and i guess it's also because it's probably the most common helm you can find in the sca and i'm not fond to how it distributes its weight and the crappy vision a hounskull visor can give it. and the safety requirements of the sca makes you to take a few but minor alterations to the bascinet so that the visor can remain locked in place. also the bascinet pretty much forces me to have a late 14th-early 15th century kit. i'd much rather focus on the late 16th century.
while i really like the look of the bascinet, i'm more of a fan of the later close helms and armets tbh. the way those helms wrap around your head and actually lock in place by either leather strapping, spring pins and/or hooks is a lot more comfortable imo. takes the weight off the top of your head and neck. also visor slits can get pretty damn historically close to the eyes too so that's always a plus, especially in the context of foot combat.[/QUOTE]
Well, I will use the Bascinet for Ross Fechten mainly. Since people stopped using Bascinets for jousting back in the day when one too many lost their head when the lance hit the snout dead-on.
I will get a suit of armour through my tutor to a price I have been told not to mention to anyone. Which is to say, [B]cheap as fuck while being some of the best stuff you can acquire[/B] :v:
[QUOTE=kimchimafia;47806326]that's a pretty damn good price for the helm, especially if it has all that hema/botn/jousting stuff in mind. shittier helms often go for higher here and they're generally unsafe to use in any combat sport. and they don't even look good.
as for my bascinet, i'd say it's a mixture of both quality and design. it protects my head in the game of sca well but there's a lot of things i'm not very happy with. it's too tailored for the sca so it's over-sized, disproportional compared to historical examples and it has a fixed bar grill. i'd also want to make the transition to a more historical full closed helmet sooner rather than later.
and i guess it's also because it's probably the most common helm you can find in the sca and i'm not fond to how it distributes its weight and the crappy vision a hounskull visor can give it. and the safety requirements of the sca makes you to take a few but minor alterations to the bascinet so that the visor can remain locked in place. also the bascinet pretty much forces me to have a late 14th-early 15th century kit. i'd much rather focus on the late 16th century.
while i really like the look of the bascinet, i'm more of a fan of the later close helms and armets tbh. the way those helms wrap around your head and actually lock in place by either leather strapping, spring pins and/or hooks is a lot more comfortable imo. takes the weight off the top of your head and neck. also visor slits can get pretty damn historically close to the eyes too so that's always a plus, especially in the context of foot combat.[/QUOTE]
Really? I find bascinets and other full-covering helmets all the time in the 150-200 range. Mass produced, sure, but they are 2 mm steel and have good reviews.
That said...I'd enjoy a handmade one since that one could be made to be more accurate, AFAIK helmets back then had armour distribution like tanks, 2mm in the front, 1.5 mm on the sides, 1 in the back...
[editline]27th May 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sunkite;47810215]Well, I will use the Bascinet for Ross Fechten mainly. Since people stopped using Bascinets for jousting back in the day when one too many lost their head when the lance hit the snout dead-on.
I will get a suit of armour through my tutor to a price I have been told not to mention to anyone. Which is to say, [B]cheap as fuck while being some of the best stuff you can acquire[/B] :v:[/QUOTE]
...could you at least tell us who's producing it, pretty please?
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;47816558]Really? I find bascinets and other full-covering helmets all the time in the 150-200 range. Mass produced, sure, but they are 2 mm steel and have good reviews.[/QUOTE]
it's probably due to the lack of armourers in australia tbh. most of the mass produced ones i can find are usually too thin or go well over 200 dollars lol. i've seen a crappy looking great helm go around for 350 dollars here. helms that i can find that stay around that 150-200 dollar range or lower are exclusively made for the sca. can't joust with a fixed bar grill lol.
mass produced helms are also welded together a lot and like you've said, are made of a uniform thickness. not very historical. something like stainless steel makes the helm look even more out of place. mass produced helmets also have the issue of often being shaped wrong and things that are a little too big/too small/etc... once you get close fitting helmets, shape and fit become so important and they pretty much have to be tailor made.
[QUOTE=Sunkite;47810215]Well, I will use the Bascinet for Ross Fechten mainly. Since people stopped using Bascinets for jousting back in the day when one too many lost their head when the lance hit the snout dead-on.
I will get a suit of armour through my tutor to a price I have been told not to mention to anyone. Which is to say, [B]cheap as fuck while being some of the best stuff you can acquire[/B] :v:[/QUOTE]
i'm just curious to how cheap your harness is gonna be. i mean, some of the best you can acquire and being cheap as fuck? if it's less than 10,000 dollars then you have to tell us who's making it lol.
I would if I could mates. But have been told not to.
Keep in mind that this armour is not meant to show off and be pretty, just do what it has to do.
Therefore there will not be many details/bling on it. It's gonna get dented and scratched anyway.
Being some of the best might be an exaggeration on my side. But it will work and be sturdy as I wrote. :v:
And my tutor has a shitload of connections.
[QUOTE=Sunkite;47817004]I would if I could mates. But have been told not to.
Keep in mind that this armour is not meant to show off and be pretty, just do what it has to do.
Therefore there will not be many details/bling on it. It's gonna get dented and scratched anyway.
Being some of the best might be an exaggeration on my side. But it will work and be sturdy as I wrote. :v:
And my tutor has a shitload of connections.[/QUOTE]
At least I know who to suck up to...I'll have to visit sometime!
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;47817235]At least I know who to suck up to...I'll have to visit sometime![/QUOTE]
You should! We're always up for a bout or two and giving some lessons for those interested!
And as a thank you for my help at the medieval fair I just got a long bow my tutor has made himself as a gift.
God damn.
Now I'm getting jealous, haha....We got free lunch for attending the Kungsträdgården medieval fair.
I can tell you it's quite overwhelming. He said he had a gift for me, but this is way too fucking much.
It's made of walnut and has this orange finish to it.
Gonna start practicing with it on saturday.
Free lunch can be quite good too though. :v:
I am also to tell you that you are very much welcome to come visit us, G-strogg.
I'm ready anytime the time and money is available, but that will be a while I think :v:
Well, the bad news is that I ended up not being able to try anything due to being out of town for the better part of two weeks.
The good news is the thread'll probably be a bit livelier come Saturday when I go get beaten with blunt metal objects for the first time, I'll probably have a bunch of questions after that.
you going to the SCA community or the HEMA group?
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;47868016]you going to the SCA community or the HEMA group?[/QUOTE]
HEMA. I don't really want to get into the other aspects of SCA right now and I wouldn't want to show up repeatedly dressed normally like a filthy casual.
just a note
historical garb is not required for fighter prac. pretty much no one comes in with historical clothing unless there's an official tourney going on or something. someone will probably lend you some garb for free as well.
anyways good luck with hema!
[QUOTE=kimchimafia;47870367]just a note
historical garb is not required for fighter prac. pretty much no one comes in with historical clothing unless there's an official tourney going on or something. someone will probably lend you some garb for free as well.
anyways good luck with hema![/QUOTE]
Oh, okay. I thought it was a "bring your tunic and plate-mail" policy.
I'll check out the SCA thing if the HEMA thing works out then.
Well I actually went after getting delayed by another week.
Not sure what to say at the moment but it sure was fun.
Still talking about the HEMA group?
Need more HEMA related information & discussion please!
I live in the midwest US, there's NOTHING like this within several hours for me - I really enjoy reading about your guys' experiences and HEMA events etc :) Honestly this thread is one of the reasons I keep coming back to facepunch. :words:
[url]http://www.communitywalk.com/HistoricalEuropeanMartialArts(WesternNorthAmerica)[/url] checked this out yet? If you live in a big town, you might just be lucky.
And, I'll have some stuff to post soon, I hope.
thread's been abandoned for awhile so i'm just gonna throw in two website links and a book recommendation (related to armour because that's the part i'm most interested and knowledgeable about)
anyone in the sca (or is interested in the sca) or is just interested in armour in general, look no further than this one: [URL="http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB3/"]http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB3/[/URL]
you have people who just focus on sporty non-historical armour to a lot of experts who make some of the best armour made today, close to historical pieces as they can get. it's great for learning nearly every aspect of armour and armour making. for more sca-specific stuff, lots of good info about what the sca-culture is like and tips for sca combat.
for a more general site: [URL="http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/"]http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/[/URL]
this one is very good. pretty much anything related to ancient-early modern historical warfare gets discussed here. lots of good experts here and it's a very good source of info. it's also a good place to gather info about swords and it has a bunch of reviews.
for my book recommendation: The Knight and the Blast Furnace by Alan Williams
a book detailing almost entirely about the armour industry and the metallurgy of armour during the medieval-early modern period. it's pretty much one of the must have books anyone should own if they're interested in historical armour or reproducing historical armour. it's fantastic and it's huge (around 1000 pages long). however i don't you'll have much luck trying to buy them today for cheap as i think they're longer in print which is a huge bummer.
Good post, good links, especially for us with an interest in historical protection.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ijy8Ky_vrI[/media]
random video as content.
Was out doing morning practice with a friend today, we did some sparring with only masks as protection, worked very fine actually. Only injury was a slight blow on my finger because I brought up my hands too much when doing a krumphau...
I might actually make a post on doing a correct krumphau later on, if people are interested
i'm interested
informative posts that keep this thread alive are always good
Alright so let's talk krumphau.
The krumphau (crooked cut) is one of the five meisterhaus (master strokes) described by Johannes Liechtenauer in the Codex Döbringer. This cut has of course seen a lot of reinterpretation by the later masters who derived their work from him. Nonetheless, here's the original description from Master Liechtenauer:
[quote]
Crooked on him with nimbleness,
throw the point on the hands.
Who performs the crooked well,
with stepping he hinders many a stroke.
Strike crooked to the flats
of the Masters if you want to weaken them.
When it clashes above,
Then move away, that I will praise.
Don't do the Crooked, strike short,
Changing through show with this.
Strike crooked to who irritates you,
the Noble War will confuse him,
that he will not know truthfully
where he can be without danger.
[/quote]
This is actually one of the more easier parts of the verse to decrypt.
The first two stanzas essentially urges the fencer to strike crooked onto the hands of the opponent, preferrably with a step. The usual interpretation of this is that it should be done in the indes - as the opponent is attacking. As the cut is called the crooked cut, it usually passes vertically over the center line in a circular fashion, and can therefore catch any incoming blades in your two upper openings. "Strike crooked to the flats" refers to striking directly on the blade of an opponent, as he is attacking, and this will weaken the strike. If you do this well you could strike the opponent's sword into the ground, as his strike is coming in(Personal experience, not described in a manual or other interpretation).
In my interpretation, the krumphau should be done with the aid of the body. As you will step in a diagonal manner (either forwards or backwards, either to drive into the opponents strike or evade it), you can use hip movements to strengthen the strike, which is usually only powered by your hands and arms. The arms should be extended, however not in a fashion that you will put your hands up to your head or above that. This compromises the safety of the attack, in my opinion. You have to trust that the length of the sword will cover your upper body, even if you keep your hands in the chest/abdomen area (where it should be, in my opinion). And if you're planning to strike on the opponents sword, keeping your hands low will actually help in that regard.
Here's a plate from Talhoffers fechtbuch, showing what happens just after a krumphau.
[img]https://thehemaists.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/de_fechtbuch_talhoffer_020.jpg[/img]
The accompanying description says that after the krump on the sword has happened, you would use your false/short edge to cut at the opponents face. To do this, you need to add a detail. Usually you will see the krump performed as a full circular motion, and while I agree this should be the strike's intent and scope, there's no point in continuing the strike after you hit your opponent's sword (this can sometimes lead to you leading his sword into you, in fact). If you strike true and stop as you connect, you will notice that you will have displaced the opponents sword entirely, and you will have a good opening to strike instantly to the face. And as a final note, note how Talhoffer's image uses the thumb grip. While the krump can be done in either the thumb or hammerfist grip, I'd recommend for beginners to use the hammerfist, as you won't accidentally do a krump that is only powered by your right wrist.
Finally, some media.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bulXaHzNJ9Q[/media]
These guys usually do interpretations well, but I am a bit miffed about the first krump being held high aloft the face. I'd argue that if you strike on TOP of the opponents hand you will help him strike into you. That being said, they could've done it this way for safety reasons, as the krump will easily break a finger or a wrist.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ckouxaz0T50[/media]
These guys demonstrate my previous point a bit more, going to high above will be too weak.
That's all for now. Might do more.
[editline]14th July 2015[/editline]
Oh and if there are any questions you can of course ask
There's a shitload of talk about warfare in the Late Medieval/ Renaissance period in this thread. Let's spice it up a notch.
I wanted to talk about warfare in the Early Middle Ages. Army composition, fighting style, e.t.c. Pitch in whatever you know.
Personally, I have been reading a lot about the Carolingian military and I was surprised to find that not only did they have a strong and decently well equipped army, but that they had standing troops. Sure, they probably functioned more like a warrior aristocracy like citizens of Greece and Rome before and knights after, but I thought the first true standing army was the warriors who sailed with King Henry in the 100 Years War, as they were trained, equipped, and paid an actual wage like modern soldiers. I wonder if the leudes were actually paid a stipend for their service or if they relief more on the traditional 'honor and noble ranking" system of most nations before and after. Does anybody know?
I was also surprised to find such heavily regulated equipment. Documents from the era have survived that showed administrators up to Charlemagne himself issuing ordinances for troops to come with specific equipment, such as the laeti or militia of a city being armed with a bow and a spear/shield combo for every soldier. Most of the time, people were called to war and they just brought whatever equipment they could afford, so seeing an actual ordinance for a specific type of soldier is quite remarkable and shows just how well connected the Carolingian world actually was. Only the Roman Empire of old seemed to match them in military organization and cohesiveness, which comes as no surprise since much of the Carolingian war machine was rebuilt from the Roman one.
[QUOTE=BananaFoam;48209137]There's a shitload of talk about warfare in the Late Medieval/ Renaissance period in this thread. Let's spice it up a notch.
I wanted to talk about warfare in the Early Middle Ages. Army composition, fighting style, e.t.c. Pitch in whatever you know.
Personally, I have been reading a lot about the Carolingian military and I was surprised to find that not only did they have a strong and decently well equipped army, but that they had standing troops. Sure, they probably functioned more like a warrior aristocracy like citizens of Greece and Rome before and knights after, but I thought the first true standing army was the warriors who sailed with King Henry in the 100 Years War, as they were trained, equipped, and paid an actual wage like modern soldiers. I wonder if the leudes were actually paid a stipend for their service or if they relief more on the traditional 'honor and noble ranking" system of most nations before and after. Does anybody know?
[/QUOTE]
Actually, while the term "standing army" was invented somewhere in the 16th (or was it 17th?) century, the concept is old as heck. There are speculations that the first standing army is as old as about 2600 BC. A found stele recording battles, show soldiers fighting in a phalanx. Fighting in a phalanx is obviously something that needs training and discipline, so the argument is that the stele proves that there were professional soldiers. However, a professional army could still be disbanded during peacetime. But looking at some other tablets, these soldiers were actually given their equipment and armour, which is a step beyond soldiers bringing their own. This leads me to believe that the Sumer could have been the first standing army.
But ignoring that, I'd definitely say that the Roman legions were a standing army, at least during the imperial period. During that period, the empire was more or less at war all the time anyway, so even if the army was on reservation, they weren't disbanded, but rather continously maintained all the time.
So while I don't know jack about the Carolingian military, I'd be willing to bet they got paid for their service, while still having to fashion their own equipment. This kind of makes it sound like the entire army was a big mercenary group but there's obviously something more at play which I'm ignoring or missing.
Also, we could have a different definition of standing army, but anyways, this is what I think about it. (and King Henry having the first sounds absurdly late, to be quite honest).
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;48211748]But ignoring that, I'd definitely say that the Roman legions were a standing army, at least during the imperial period. During that period, the empire was more or less at war all the time anyway, so even if the army was on reservation, they weren't disbanded, but rather continously maintained all the time.[/QUOTE]
the romans did indeed have a standing army after the marian reforms which took place during the late republic under general marius. they were trained, equipped and paid by the state and were around even during peace time. prior to that, i guess the most important part to the pre-marian army recruitment is that soldiers had to bring and buy their own equipment.
also i think bananafoam's talking about the first standing army after the romans in western europe since standing armies and navies obviously existed elsewhere too. i thought that achievement went to charless vii not henry. but then again i've also heard that the black army of hungary could have been considered the more important standing "army" that was created in western europe after the romans.
other than that, dunno anything about the carolingian military. however one thing one to note that is often in the late 15th century and beyond, kings and nobles often bought a large surplus amount of arms and armour that could be used by their troops in war. so essentially they too would supply a small percentage of their troops with equipment bought by their king/noble, i.e. a small standing army. it could explain why their army was decently well equipped.
also i don't think we'll have much luck discussing individual fighting styles prior to i33 which is late 13th century to early 14th century.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.