I've been watching HEMA videos, and it's quite interesting how little resemblance fighting with sword/spear/shield on TV and in movies has to the real thing. I am not a HEMA practitioner, however here is a some of what I've gleaned from their videos:
No one sane would take off their helmet in the middle of a battlefield for the most important fight/battle. You don't slice with a sword through plate armor or decent chain mail. It just doesn't happen in real battle conditions. For that matter, it's not so easy to slice through padded cloth gambeson armor! Also, the "reality-tv" shows that have covered historical weapons are often bogus. You "half-sword" to wrestle your opponent to the ground, then guide the stabby point of a specialized sword through an eye-hole or other gap in their armor. Likewise, real battles between knights didn't consist of them bashing at each other, using their swords crudely like glorified metal clubs.
Long exchanges of blows/parries in movies are just for show. In fact, there are fighting manuals that urge you not to parry if you can help it, but rather always "bind" a weapon in the process of some kind of counterattack.
Social class meant a hell of a lot. On the battlefield, it determined how much armor you could afford to keep up, which made a big difference to how likely you'd be killed.
Most swords were sidearms, not main battlefield weapons, analogous in role to an automatic pistol vs. an assault rifle. For most of western history, and in many other parts of the world, the main battlefield weapons were polearms, often used in conjunction with a shield. This even applies to a certain extent to Japan! (Though the naginata fell out of favor and for awhile actually became a sign of social status for women.)
Katana are not magic, and there were and are european, middle-eastern, and indian subcontinental swords capable of equivalent feats of cutting.
In the movie "The Lion in Winter" there is a fight scene that is quite similar to what you describe as accurate. It's actually quite disturbing, as it depicts the frightening amount of intimacy involved in wrestling someone to the ground, pinning them to the ground, and then struggling to stab them to death. Not exactly the glorious victorious violence depicted in most movies.
I assume these wounds described of a 1689 battle were from Scottish claymores:
"Many of General Mackay's officers and soldiers were cut down through the skull and neck to the very breasts; others had skulls cut off above their ears like night caps; some soldiers had both their bodies and cross-belts cut through at one blow; pikes and small swords were cut like willows..."
I was wondering who the figure with the beard and golden crown was - turns out it might be a depiction of the author himself! (According to this [1], which also has a full translation.) I love this bit from his preface:
"I say that when I taught this art I taught it secretly, so that no other person was present except for the student and some close relatives.
Also, it happened that when others were present they stayed with Sacramental promise not to divulge the plays they saw from me, Fiore.
And most of all I was wary of fencing Masters and of their students. And they invited me, the Masters, out of envy, to fight with sharp and pointed swords in an arming jacket, without any other armour except for a pair of chamois leather gloves, and all this had happened because I did not want to practice with them nor teach them anything of my art.
And this accident happened five times, so that I have been requested ['called out']. And five times, for my honour, I have had to fight in strange places, without relatives and without friends, not trusting others, but in God an the art and in myself, Fiore, and in my sword. And by the grace of God I, Fiore, remained with honour and without scars upon my person."
If you like old combat manuals, you should checkout Hans Talhoffers' "Alte Armatur und Ringkunst".
It has been digitized in nice quality. Page 162 is especially interesting.
Do you mean the man and woman? pp 163+ (eg 164, 165) - the series shows a man in a hole with what appears to be a sharpened club or an unusual short sword. The man is fighting against a woman who bears a length of cloth with a weight in the end (perhaps a stocking with a stone in). The man and woman are in a small arena and wear white tabards/surcoats decorated with the St.George cross.
If you are interested in some amazing HEMA(historic european martial arts) videos check Matt Easton channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt14YOvYhd5FCGCwcjhrOdA I been an addict for a long time. It is fascinating just how bad depictions of fighting are in movies, even ones considered good.
The swords illustrate the seven basic "strokes": six in a "flower", and one stab (the bottom one). Mastering all of the ways to get your weapon from point "A" (near you, in a proper guard), to point "B" (somewhere inside of your opponent), through one of these directions, is the purpose of the book.
As a serious answer... the image characterizes the qualities of the warrior by relating them to animals: Attentiveness (jackal), Speed (tiger), Strength (elephant), Courage (lion)
[+] [-] stcredzero|11 years ago|reply
No one sane would take off their helmet in the middle of a battlefield for the most important fight/battle. You don't slice with a sword through plate armor or decent chain mail. It just doesn't happen in real battle conditions. For that matter, it's not so easy to slice through padded cloth gambeson armor! Also, the "reality-tv" shows that have covered historical weapons are often bogus. You "half-sword" to wrestle your opponent to the ground, then guide the stabby point of a specialized sword through an eye-hole or other gap in their armor. Likewise, real battles between knights didn't consist of them bashing at each other, using their swords crudely like glorified metal clubs.
Long exchanges of blows/parries in movies are just for show. In fact, there are fighting manuals that urge you not to parry if you can help it, but rather always "bind" a weapon in the process of some kind of counterattack.
Social class meant a hell of a lot. On the battlefield, it determined how much armor you could afford to keep up, which made a big difference to how likely you'd be killed.
Most swords were sidearms, not main battlefield weapons, analogous in role to an automatic pistol vs. an assault rifle. For most of western history, and in many other parts of the world, the main battlefield weapons were polearms, often used in conjunction with a shield. This even applies to a certain extent to Japan! (Though the naginata fell out of favor and for awhile actually became a sign of social status for women.)
Katana are not magic, and there were and are european, middle-eastern, and indian subcontinental swords capable of equivalent feats of cutting.
[+] [-] bglazer|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Qworg|11 years ago|reply
Reddit (not authoritative, but illustrative): http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1pl35a/how_po...
[+] [-] sys32768|11 years ago|reply
"Many of General Mackay's officers and soldiers were cut down through the skull and neck to the very breasts; others had skulls cut off above their ears like night caps; some soldiers had both their bodies and cross-belts cut through at one blow; pikes and small swords were cut like willows..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=lFwJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA32#v=one...
[+] [-] fisadev|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] benbreen|11 years ago|reply
"I say that when I taught this art I taught it secretly, so that no other person was present except for the student and some close relatives.
Also, it happened that when others were present they stayed with Sacramental promise not to divulge the plays they saw from me, Fiore.
And most of all I was wary of fencing Masters and of their students. And they invited me, the Masters, out of envy, to fight with sharp and pointed swords in an arming jacket, without any other armour except for a pair of chamois leather gloves, and all this had happened because I did not want to practice with them nor teach them anything of my art.
And this accident happened five times, so that I have been requested ['called out']. And five times, for my honour, I have had to fight in strange places, without relatives and without friends, not trusting others, but in God an the art and in myself, Fiore, and in my sword. And by the grace of God I, Fiore, remained with honour and without scars upon my person."
[1] http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Fiore_de%27i_Liberi
[+] [-] fisadev|11 years ago|reply
http://wiktenauer.com/
[+] [-] daktanis|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tokai|11 years ago|reply
http://www.kb.dk/da/nb/materialer/haandskrifter/HA/e-mss/tha...
[+] [-] pbhjpbhj|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tlear|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] daktanis|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] loganmhb|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Varkiil|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thechao|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tdumitrescu|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] inDigiNeous|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wildlogic|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] delcaran|11 years ago|reply
That's it.
[+] [-] hans_mueller|11 years ago|reply