Unfortunately, it seems that much of fencing history
(or people's opintions of it, at least) is based on
semilogical assumptions, and has been since Egerton
Castle's time at least. It's a good thing we have
people like Chris Amberger around...

--- Chris <c_holzman@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Russell,
>
> I got a response back from Sean Hayes over on SFI -
> and Sean related
> that Gaugler never said anything about horses etc.
> in relation to
> Radaelli. I can certainly see where perhaps some of
> that thought
> comes from. Check the link provided earlier for
> Sean's reply..
>
> I will say that I do have a fencing/duelling sabre
> in my collection,
> from the 1870's - its an absolute spitting image of
> a Radaelli, minus
> the branches on the guard. It weighs 20.5oz. I
> *can* make finger only
> cuts with it, but its not all that useful - wrist
> and fingers is
> better, controllable, functional..
> Elbow/wrist/fingers and suddenly
> we're really in business.
>
> More than anything I just get that feeling that it's
> nothing but a set
> of semi-logical assumptions. I'm rather afraid we
> may simply be in a
> situation of too many years having passed, to ever
> get any real good
> answers.
>
> *sigh*
> thanks,
> Chris
>
>
> --- In classicalfencing@yahoogroups.com, Russell
> Hogg
> <durendal78@y...> wrote:
> > I think this idea comes from the fact that
> Radaelli
> > was an instructor at the military fencing school;
> > i.e., as you said, sabre + military = cavalry.
> This
> > myth has caused all kinds of problems -- how many
> of
> > us were first told that the sabre target is the
> torso
> > because that's where you would aim your blows
> agaist a
> > rider?
> >
> > I know Gaugler mentions a cavalry mentality in his
> > "Science of Fencing" and I remember doing a double
> > take, since Radaelli's system is, I think, pretty
> > clearly oriented toward the duel (but off the top
> of
> > my head I don't remember exactly what he said or
> how
> > strongly he worded it).
> >
> > I think Gaugler claims that the use of
> elbow-driven
> > cuts is related to military application, but I
> would
> > be inclined to disagree. As anyone who has
> handled a
> > heavy period duelling sabre would know, these
> weapons
> > were not really conducive to wrist or finger-based
> > fencing (at least as far as circular cuts go).
> The
> > use of the elbow thus comes from a mechanical
> > necessity common to both weapons rather than a
> split
> > between military and civilian sabre practices.
> >
> > Doubtless some of the Radaelli techniques could be
> > applied to a heavier weapon on horseback, and he
> may
> > have taken that into consideration, but someone
> who
> > knows more about military sabre than me would be a
> > better judge of that.
> >
> > Despite any cavalry applications he may have had
> in
> > mind, the notion that he was "only interested in
> > mounted troops" is false. I don't know any
> fencing
> > master versed in his system who would make that
> > statement. The sabre system itself aside, why on
> > earth would he include a section on "spada"
> (duelling
> > sword) in his treatise if he only wanted to train
> > horsemen to cut down poor grunts with rifles?
> >
> > Of course, I may be misreading Maestro Gaugler's
> > beliefs -- one of his students may be able to
> correct
> > me if I have misinterpreted his text -- but even
> he
> > wouldn't argue (I think) that Radaelli was PURELY
> > horse-focused.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Russell
> >
> > --- Chris <c_holzman@h...> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Group,
> > >
> > > Please take a look at
> > >
> >
>
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthr...threadid=56831
> > >
> > > I posted this and then thought I might want to
> > > broaden my search as
> > > well, so I'm posting a link here.
> > >
> > > If anyone can provide any information about some
> of
> > > the claims we see
> > > reference to Radaelli, I'd be most appreciative
> of
> > > it.
> > >
> > > To reiterate - we see all kinds of claims that
> > > Radaelli was only
> > > interested in mounted troops - yet the treatise
> > > regarding his system
> > > says no such thing, indeed, it fails to mention
> > > anything about mounted
> > > troops, cavalry, horses, etc.
> > >
> > > Can any of you shed any light on where these
> claims
> > > might come from,
> > > and what sources back up those claims?
> > >
> > > Lacking any mention in the treatise, I would
> suspect
> > > that it must have
> > > come from the old myth that "fencing sabre came
> > > directly from the
> > > cavalry sabre" especially as cavlary was from
> the
> > > old days, and
> > > Radaelli was from the old days, and both used
> > > sabres..
> > >
> > > Anyone?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Chris
> > > --
> > > Chris Holzman
> > > Moniteur D' Armes
> > > River City Fencing Club
> > > Wichita, KS
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUI...LSAA/VRUolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

----------------------------------------------------------------------
The CFML is sponsored in part by Purpleheart Armoury, now carrying rapier blunts and leather gorgets. http://www.woodenswords.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/classicalfencing/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
classicalfencing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/