"Real" weapons?

[keith]

well fencing, the modern sport, has no relation to fencing, try to bleed someone out. We fence in the (generally) complete ignorance of the pain, mutilation and blood loss that might occur if we were doing it with sharp weapons and no physical protection.

The weapons may be swords but we are not duellists.

[ThatReallyHurt]

Hmm... a broomhandle is just a broomhandle unless someone's chasing you around with it - then it's a weapon, right?

Just because we're (hopefully) not trying to injure our opponent, does it really make it any less a weapon?

Besides, how many of you have limped away from the fencing club, nursing various bruises, welts, or cuts?

[keith]

Originally Posted by ThatReallyHurt

Hmm... a broomhandle is just a broomhandle unless someone's chasing you around with it - then it's a weapon, right?

well speaking of kendo, don't you think they would do things slightly differently if they had real swords and actually wanted to hurt each other (like not aiming for the strong points of the armour for example).

Originally Posted by ThatReallyHurt

Besides, how many of you have limped away from the fencing club, nursing various bruises, welts, or cuts?

Yeh, and we fence like this when we are all safe and wrapped up using blunt weapons, how long do you think any of us would last with sharps?

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by keith

well fencing, the modern sport, has no relation to fencing, try to bleed someone out. We fence in the (generally) complete ignorance of the pain, mutilation and blood loss that might occur if we were doing it with sharp weapons and no physical protection.

The weapons may be swords but we are not duellists.

I totally agree with your final line. That's something that has been noted throughout the ages. Even Aldo Nadi commented on the huge differences between the sport of fencing and art of duelling.

However, no relation is a something I don't agree with. Closely related can and most likely will be argued to death here, but there is a relation, even if it's a 6th cousin twice removed on your step-father's side that lives half way round the world, that you've never spoken to...

On that note our implements are weapons. Using them however does not mean that we must use them they way they were used centuries ago. Using them properly requires realizing that one can do things with them that either weren't possible, or weren't effective. After all, my epee although similar to a duelling epee, isn't one. A touch scored by my epee is nothing like a touch scored with a duelling epee of the past. There's no blood for one thing...

[sarmaticus]

Originally Posted by keith

well fencing, the modern sport, has no relation to fencing, try to bleed someone out. We fence in the (generally) complete ignorance of the pain, mutilation and blood loss that might occur if we were doing it with sharp weapons and no physical protection.

The weapons may be swords but we are not duellists.

They are certainly related but they aren't the same thing.
The repertoire of fencing we use now was developed when the art was still practice for duelling - perhaps flicks to the back and "neuvieme" were less used, though ;-)
I agree with your last point. Fencing with sharps would be a different experience - just as modern infantry combat would be a different experience from paint-balling.

[Prometheus]

I dont know if sport fencing equipment counts as real weapons, but these (WMV file) sure do.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

If you sharpen the tips, they most certainly are.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by sarmaticus

Here in the UK, at least, people ask which *weapon* a person fences.

Same here.

All of the coaches I've had have told me that "sword" is incorrect because fencing blades are not sharp on the sides or on the tip. If you were to sharpen one, "sword" would be a correct term.

[noodle]

yes, they're real weapons.

you can hold a sabre by the tip and club someone with the bell quite effectively.

almost anything is a frickin weapon. a pencil or a pen is a huge advantage over just bare knuckles in a fight.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by achilleus

... there is a relation, even if it's a 6th cousin twice removed on your step-father's side that lives half way round the world, that you've never spoken to.

On that note our implements are weapons. Using them however does not mean that we must use them they way they were used centuries ago. Using them properly requires realizing that one can do things with them that either weren't possible, or weren't effective. After all, my epee although similar to a duelling epee, isn't one. A touch scored by my epee is nothing like a touch scored with a duelling epee of the past.

I agree. Although I recognize that my sport blade is similar to those weapons of old -- and I s'pose I *could* use it to harm another person if I had the mind to -- I've never for a moment held to the romantic notion that I'm dueling. It's about athletic competition.

I wonder if the various ball games players have the same historic refugees among their ranks? "Dude, there is no way our Aztec ancestors would ever throw a pass like that..."

[carlos]

On the other hand, basketball has its own set of rules that are internally consistent and make sense with the ultimate goal, getting the ball through the hoop, without reference to a nonsporting version of basketball. Fencing, and fencing rules though, are informed by the historical and combat effects of duelling. However far removed our weapons are from functional weapons and however different sport moves are from duelling actions, they do bear some relationship. Otherwise, fencing would be wholly arbitrary could just be trying to lasso the opponent with a nylon thread, or whack him on the head with a foam hammer.

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by noodle

yes, they're real weapons.

you can hold a sabre by the tip and club someone with the bell quite effectively.

almost anything is a frickin weapon. a pencil or a pen is a huge advantage over just bare knuckles in a fight.

Yeah, that's what I meant when I mentioned the broomstick earlier (I wasn't thinking about Kendo)...

[snuffy_Purdue]

yes, it's a common saying around here that we should be able to do more stuff to promote fencing on campus, because a football player with a strong chair and short fuse can do more damage than a fencer, who often deems others too inferior to even worry about breaking their cool.

[Teme]

Well, there must be something behind the FIE safety regulations and the fact that every year hordes of fencers get punctured -- one fatally every ten years or so.

[VELISARIOS]

What? it is not a sword???
You know epee means duel sword, and sabre is the disentat of the cavarly sword.
So all off them are swords.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

All of the coaches I've had have told me that "sword" is incorrect because fencing blades are not sharp on the sides or on the tip.

Here's some more semantic quibbling for you: the estoc, many rapiers and some smallswords did not have sharpened edges, and they were definitely swords. Several Norse sagas mention swords so dulled by use that midway through a battle they would no longer 'bite'. But they did not stop being swords at that instant. They just became blunt ones.

However, except in the very broad sense adopted by Noodle and ThatReallyHurt, no, modern Olympic 'weapons' aren't really weapons ( or swords, either ), French and Spanish appelations to the contrary notwithstanding. ( Is a glue or soldering 'gun' really a gun? Is an Olympic 'hammer' a real hammer? Lots of words are used for things they no longer are anymore, strictly speaking. )

The fencing sabre...well, I've held no end of cavalry sabres, including copies of the straight-bladed British 1908 Infantry and Cavalry sabres, and they feel and handle nothing like ours. Castle called even the Radaelli sabre a 'silly little toy' in comparison to the real things, and much though it pains me to admit it he was right...and ours is even more toy-like. Nor is the foil anything like a smallsword, really---and inasmuch as it was devised to be a mere training tool from the outset it is of the three the least weapon-like. The epee comes closest to a 'real' weapon, but even it is only descended from its sharp counterpart...

[VELISARIOS]

Let me speak about the epee.
'The Epée is a direct descendant of the short sword used by courtiers for duelling. As honour was generally satisfied by drawing first blood, in Epée points are scored by hitting first, anywhere on the body.'
So it is tart as real weapon, it was the weapon for duels (in the present day offcourse the tactics are different. Now we want only to take the point but in those early days the swordman want to live from the duel. So the technicks and the tactics were a little bit different.)
The sabre is the descendant of the cavarly sword. Offcours now it is not heavy and it is not edged as the prototype. But the technics of parry, thrusts e.t.c are the same. The fisrt parry for example are the same with real sabre. The difference is... the tactic.
In foil we have the same conclusion. The difference again is the tactic. So if one fencer use a real weapon (sabre, duel sword, rapier) the problem which have is what tactic he would use against the oponent, and not the technick (a lunge is always a lunge. The point is when and how he will do. In modern fencing we do not care if the point of the oponent sword hit us. The only think that we have do do is to touch them first. In real fight is different.)
Everithing is the tactic.

[Teme]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Castle called even the Radaelli sabre a 'silly little toy' in comparison to the real things, and much though it pains me to admit it he was right...and ours is even more toy-like.

Must have been the first time ever a British Master mocked an Italian Master

Seriously though, Castle was much into renaissance fencing, while Radaelli was teaching contemporary cavalry soldiers to survive a duel or melee. I believe the 1908 pattern sabre is modelled after these 'new and improved' lighter and more efficient weapons -- as all military swords were at the time.

I'm not in any way claiming that our current saber is comparable to 'real' swords, but there is a clear decendancy.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Teme

Must have been the first time ever a British Master mocked an Italian Master

Oh, what a Cheese-y remark!

I'm not in any way claiming that our current saber is comparable to 'real' swords, but there is a clear decendancy.

I don't disagree with you there.

[Teme]

Hey, since we're hot on the topic, you having toyed with 1908 pattern sabers, how long do think it would take you to adjust to use it, technically and tactically?