Blade Length in La Verdadera Destreza (Part 2 of 2)

Hello again,

This is part 2 of this post.  The first part dealt with the historical context of blade length and how I personally selected the blade size I use. That post is located here: Blade Length in La Verdadera Destreza Part 1

Part 2 of the post focuses on my insights around how blade length and distance in La Verdadera Destreza (LVD) affect the major techniques and concepts used in this Spanish style of fencing.  

Some of this post will require previous a knowledge of the concept of Atajo as well as the 4 general techniques.  If you need more information on the 4 generals, I made a post on them here: Simplicity and Complexity in the 4 Generals

If you want a tutorial in them or more information on what an atajo is, I always suggest people begin with Puck and Mary Curtis' work "From the Page to the Practice".  It is contained in the anthology "In the Service of Mars, Vol. 2" .  That book can be purchased here: In Service of Mars, Vol. II 

How Blade Length Influences LVD Techniques:

In my first post I described how I use a relatively larger blade (45 inches), but due to my being 6 feet 5 inches tall it is in fact proportional to my body in regards to period measurement techniques.  In this post I will be discussing the length of the blade and its affects on LVD fencing techniques regardless of the size of the fencer using it.

I will say that I agree with Pacheco in some ways about how a longer blade does have a number of weaknesses.  I do not agree with him when he seems to say that there is nothing but weakness and vanity in the larger blade, although due to my size I have never fought with one that would be disproportionately long. I fall much more strongly into the Thibault philosophy that each length has its strengths and there are situations where each is appropriate.   I firmly believe it is the Diestro's job to understand those and shape his utilization of the techniques around his weapon and his own strengths, all while being aware of the weaknesses and trying to minimize them.

My conversation with my friend Lupold started around the 4 generals and distance, but my thoughts on it after practice went a bit further.  You can find an awesome post that Lupold made regarding this and other material here: "Relating Italian Tempo and Spanish Distance".

The insights I gained in relation to blade length can be broken down into 3 major areas of technique. They are the 4 generals, atajos, and footwork / measure.  I had some difficulty deciding on which to place first since they tie in together and interweave within the style.  I took a stab at what I felt should be an appropriate arrangement, but in theory you can read or review them in any order you wish.

1. The 4 General Techniques

I started talking to Lupold about how I have been having a hard time pulling off 2 of the 4 generals while fighting (Narrowing and Line in the Cross), but the other 2 (weak under strong and weak over strong) have turned into my "go to" techniques.  This was a bit of a surprise to me as those were initially the ones I had difficulty learning slowly while drilling.

While all of the generals begin with an atajo, both the weak under and the weak over generals require the diestro to "liberate the blade", as Puck and Mary Curtis write in their manual, before executing the thrust.  This motion essentially throws the opponent's blade away for a moment to allow you an attack.  It should be noted that both are traditionally attacks to the inside line and also can be done with cuts or thrusts, but I almost exclusively thrust.  Narrowing as well as Line in Cross both require the diestro to try and maintain contact as they close, in order to control the opponent's blade from the strength of their own blade and prevent the opponent from disengaging.

Through our conversation I determined that since I have such a comparatively long blade (45 inches) I have been playing to that strength.  I use the distance and make my opponent take a risk to cross that field of battle to get to me.  This can lead to problems as I typically like playing in second intention and if I have a timid opponent or patient one, I have had to learn to use my aggression strategically or get stabbed.  I also find truth in Pacheco's warning about difficulty if the opponent comes in fast and binds you, but I have attempted to counter that through better footwork and disengages when possible. 

Where the distance intersects with the weak under and weak over is that I do not need to close or have as much control over my opponents blade as in the other 2 generals. I can circle their blade farther out, staying at a safe medio de propocion (measure of proportion), and liberate my blade or throw theirs, even if my blade has less strength.  I can honestly see why these 2 techniques are called weak above and weak below, as it is the weak part of your blade in each of these positions against the opponent's strong. Simply put, it can be a very quick and effective attack from a safe distance.

We continued the discussion to include how I can better execute the other 2 generals by maintaining my distance and instead of using thrusts at the end, turning them into cuts.  Those are much harder for me to describe at this time since I need to practice and drill them first, but I will try and remember to come back and write more about them here when I do.

Distance and personal awareness are essential to any technique.  I imagine a shorter diestro or someone with a shorter sword might have better success with a Narrowing or a Line in cross, due to a stronger starting position.   While they might be stronger when closer and controlling my blade, my job is to keep them from getting there.  I look forward to working on ways to implement the other 2 generals in a more effective manner with my weapon and distance.

2. Atajos

I also mentioned to Lupold how I was having difficulty applying my atajos effectively during combat and that I found myself  using disengages, feints, or virtual atajos to control the fight more often.  What came of this was a brief demonstration by him on how, with the shorter blade, it is easier to gain strength on the opponent's sword once they get a bit closer, while my longer blade has a great deal more weak to go through before I get to my strength.

There was no simple answer to this one for me, as the use of the atajo is essential to LVD.  I have learned to adapt with very fast disengages or if I want to enter I frequently yield my blade and attempt to move into a Spanish movement of conclusion.  Where I go once I get in there is a whole other mess, but it still allows me to play with a variety of movements.

I can also try and play with my opponent's blade as I gain distance, slowly attempting to get the atajo, or I can just move fast and pray it works.  Neither has been extremely effective and I have been left in some vulnerable positions.  I have found some success with Rada's hanging guard and I am starting to explore his use of atajo from the bottom, which goes against many of the earlier masters who dictated that the atajo be placed from above.  I am looking forward to exploring his methods of spiraling and moving to another atajo when the first attempt fails.

3. Footwork / Measure

Like in real estate, I have found that in fencing with LVD, it is all about location, location, location.  Since there is a great deal of movement in LVD with circling, you can easily substitute the word Measure for Location.  Knowing where you are and how far you are from your opponent is a necessity.

Since I have a longer blade my strategy has been to stay farther out until I decide to enter. I try to  maintain that measure until I make the decision to act and implement one of the previously discussed techniques.  I and my opponent are constantly playing a chess game of minor and major adjustments with our blades and bodies.

Where my study of LVD and distance has taken me recently has been in how I enter and how far I extend myself with my footwork as I make my entry.  Much of what I have read indicates that the end goal in LVD is to not only win, but to do so by placing yourself at the least amount of risk possible. Since almost all of the attacks and distance gaining in LVD are done on the circle, the 2 types of steps used to do that are the Traversal step (compas traversal) and the Curved step (compas curvo).

To illustrate the traverse step, below is a picture of Pacheco's circle (feet and circle are not in scale with each other).  The traverse would be a step along one of the lines of the square contained within the circle.

Don Louis Pacheco de Navarez

Libro de las grandezas de la espada (Book of the Greatness of the Sword), 1600

I have typically been using this traverse step on most of my attacks and using the curved step around the circle as a more gentle way to gain distance before I attack 

If you read Viedma's work, translated by Tim Rivera here: Spanish Swordsmanship Society of St. Louis , you will notice that he has a different take on where the step needs to be made.

Luis Diaz de Viedma

Metodo de Ensenanza de Maestros (Method of Teaching of Masters), 1639

In his manual, Viedma describes a Traverse step to be from A to B or from A to D and he also describes the curved steps along the same points, but those are made around the circumference. You can also find more information and details on the measurements of this circle in the manual and also in Lupold's post.  Viedma also has you making your attacks or entries on those letters.

"As a demonstration of the general of line in cross, the master leaves to wound the chest, giving a step from point A to point B..."

-Luis Dias de Viedma, Method of Teaching of Masters (1639)

Viedma is writing his manual to teach someone how to teach others, so there is a great deal of assumed knowledge in his writing, but it is pretty clear where he is saying you should step on these movements. This movement is not necessarily an A to C step as it might first appear in a Pacheco drawing.  The traverse is not a lunge, but instead a controlled off line angular step inside the circle and not around it.

How this realization has helped me in relation to distance and my blade length is that Viedma pretty much gave me permission to stay farther away from my opponent as I enter into the danger zone with my attack. Perhaps this is obvious to others, but I had previously been taking deeper steps to accomplish something that could possibly be achieved at a longer range and in greater safety.

Would a shorter bladed opponent need a deeper step?  Most likely or perhaps they would need to gain distance in a different way before launching one of Viedma's more shallow attack angles.  Either way this further serves to reinforce the need to understand yourself in relation to your weapon and the opponent you are fencing.

In just about a month I will be teaching a class at Pennsic on Spanish footwork and the use of the conceptual circle when fencing.  I need to organize those thoughts better and maybe I will put a post together on that, but I guarantee that what I have addressed here will be included in that class.

Summary

To over simplify this entire 2 part post it comes down to being aware of your own range and the distance needed to execute any technique.  That distance is a combination of your body, the blade you are using, as well as the location you stand in relation to your opponent.  You also have to factor in your stance and how you hold your sword when fencing.  All of this is also variable and changing constantly within the bout you are fighting.

What I enjoy and I am also frustrated by on occasion, is that LVD lays out a set of concepts to help you navigate the style and personalize it to your own body.  Many masters are pretty clear and tell you that each diestro is unique and should apply each technique slightly differently based on their own body type.  For more on that you can read Ettenhard and his interpretation of appropriate distance or Thibault and how he instructs you to make your circle.  A discussion of sword length in relation to these techniques is pretty much just the tip of the iceberg in the process of tailoring this art.

As Thibault mentions, there are things in favor of both the long and the short blade.  In the end you need a weapon you can wield effectively and one you understand in relation to yourself, your opponent, and the style of fencing that you practice.

Thanks for reading.

Blade Length in La Verdadera Destreza (Part 1 of 2)

Hello,

This will be a 2 part post this week since I have many thoughts on distance and measure in relation to La Verdadera Destreza (LVD).  I broke it into 2 posts since the last thing I want is for folks to get overwhelmed and just say TLDR (too long didn't read).  This first part will be on period blade length in the LVD style of fencing and things to consider when deciding on what size blade to use.  The second post will deal more with how blade length and distance are related to the LVD concepts of the 4 generals, atajo, and footwork/measure.

I give credit to my friend Lupold for inspiring this post.  After practice last week we had a conversation regarding the effects of blade length on the techniques in LVD.  You can find a link to his blog over on the right side of this page and here is a direct link as well: Lupold's Mad Sword Science . I will try to summarize some of these insights and their historical context, to give folks something to think about as they chose their blade length and how it might  effect their LVD fencing.

On Period Blade Length and What I Chose to Use:

I completely understand that many people will question why it matters how long your blade is, since we are practicing a modern interpretation of a historical style, be it HEMA, the SCA, or some other blade group.  That is very true to some degree, but what I will hopefully show in this and even more in the  second part of this post is that, if you are studying a historical style of fencing, the period material you are reading bases its concepts and techniques on certain premises.  One of these foundations in the Spanish style of LVD, as laid out by the period laws and masters, deals with how long your blade should be in relation to your body.

There are many arguments in the old on-line sword forums (old meaning 2006-2010) regarding what was the period LVD blade length.  Based on the Spanish law of 1564, King Philip II gave an edict saying that the length of the blade could not be longer than "5/4ths Vara". The Vara was a period measurement that did have some variation, but Puck Curtis estimates it to be 0.835 meters.  This means that 5/4th came out to approximately 41-42 inches.  It should be noted that there are also many historical Spanish rapiers (not 2 handed montantes) that are significantly longer than that, going up to 50 inches or greater in length.  I have no idea if the owners of these weapons flaunted them openly or what not, but they did exist.

Pacheco writes at length about how men with longer swords lack valor and are pretty much over compensating, if you get my drift.  He says in the same paragraph how the longer blades are slower, weaker, and at the same time appear to give the person an unfair advantage.

I will tell you that I use a long blade (Darkwood 45 inches), BUT I am also very tall at 6 feet 5 inches. I am in no way period size and would be a historical giant, but by any "period" measurement my blade is proportional to my body.

Pacheco says to measure the blade length as follows:

"... and that from the left shoulder to the extremity of the right hand there are five fourths." 

-Luis Pacheco de Narvaez, New Science (1672)

According to this standard my 45 inch blade is pretty much 5/4th vara in relation to my body.

Thibault might be considered outside of LVD standard on occasion, but he also goes in depth on how to get the correct length blade.  He agrees with Pacheco and calls the men who prefer long blades cowards, but goes into a "science" to describe the proper way to get your blade measurement.

"Therefore the measure of the sword is such that the length of the blade from the point to the quillons is equal to the half diameter; that is, if the point is set on the ground between the hollows of the two feet, the quillons come exactly to the height of the navel"

-Girard Thibault d'Anvers, Academy of the Sword (1630)

By that historical standard I should in fact be wielding a 47 inch rapier.  Thibault also precedes this standard measurement by saying that there are, "occasions more favorable for long swords, and others more favorable for the short ones".  This alone would be my suggested take away. While historical context is important, it is essential for each fencer to look at all of the evidence and decide in an informed fashion what is best for their body and sport.

That is about it for the first part of this post.  Stop back later this week to read more about my thoughts on how blade length and distance affect a number of important techniques and concepts within LVD.

Click to go directly to: Blade Length in La Verdadera Destreza (Part 2 of 2)

Thanks for reading.

Simplicity and Complexity in the 4 Generals

Hello again,

I realized during practice last night that I needed to put some of my realizations around the 4 general drills into words.  Other than footwork drills, these have been my go to activity to practice since I started working with La Verdadera Destreza (LVD).  The further I go with them the more I discover how awesome and how much complexity there is in what initially seems so simple.

Like driving along the road to a destination and spotting a wild animal on the side of the road, I have seen them show up occasionally in my bouting over the months.  They are beautiful and majestic and you want to see more, but it felt more like random chance than actual skill initially.  Now that I am seeing connections and complexities in these drills and movements I am starting to see them more in my live fencing, which is awesome.

In this post I will be discussing, what the 4 generals are, what I have been doing and why, and recent realizations around these techniques.


Let's start with what they are:

After the three universal methods, in which consists a man's defense, the general techniques rank highest... The names that we imposed on them (without obliging ourselves to defend their correctness, since it is not necessary for them) are the line in cross, narrowing, weak under the strong, and weak over the strong.

- Pacheco de Narvaez, New Science p. 442 (1672)

I initially found them in Puck Curtis' "From the Page to the Practice" which you can purchase in this anthology here: In Service of Mars, Vol. II. This is where I tell people new to LVD to start their journey.

Puck describes them wonderfully in his work as; "The general techniques are four offensive actions used to dominate or deviate the opposing steel in order to initiate attacks. With these techniques the swordsman can control the adversary's blade while moving forward.  In contrast to a defensive action on the blade, such as a deflection or parry, these are performed with the intention of striking."

Other LVD masters reference them in their works with some seeming to believe the generals to be such a foundation that they are described as simply being understood.  They also use them to describe other techniques they are teaching.

This type of atajo movement is composed of three generals, that are the general of line in cross, and the general of weak below the strong, and the case seen that in itself alone, it is the low general.

- Luis Dias de Viedma, Method of Teaching of Masters (1639)

If you want to see them in action you can find them on Ton Puey's youtube channel here: - Academia da Espada - Ton Puey. His versions are more of a Rada interpretation of them, which is wonderful as you can see that while the movements were the same, the masters interpreted them slightly different.  As Ton is Spanish (as is our style of fencing) it is important to learn the Spanish names for these movements if you want to find them on his channel.

• Line in Cross - Linea de Cruz - 
• Narrowing  - Estrechar - 
• Weak under Strong - Flaqueza Debajo de la Fuerza - 
• Weak over Strong - Flaqueza Encima de la Fuerza - 

Next, why I chose these and what I have been doing:

My logic in choosing these was based on how Puck and the masters describe them as so essential.  I thought this was the best place for me to start.  I went with the idea of the pretentious martial arts quote around fearing the man who practices 1 technique a 1000 times rather than the guy who knows a thousand techniques.  In this case there are 4 techniques not 1, but it was a place to start.  I have been studying and implementing other concepts in my LVD work, but these are what I drill every practice, what I visualize at my desk at work, and on the couch at home in various combinations.

To over simplify what we do.... DRILLING.  I have been working with Xavier, my friend and partner in Spanish.   We began with Puck's material which has all of the attacks occurring in the following stages initiated with a traverse step to the right:

• Start with an atajo on either the outside or inside line (depending on the general)
• Take a gaining step and traverse step 
• Execute the general technique
• Retreat along the new diameter while keeping the point on the opponent.  

We drill them in a circle. If I am traversing to my right we will move counter clockwise around the circle.  What I mean by this is: I am at 12 on a clock face (or the common circle) and facing my opponent who is at 6.  I execute a general to my right and end up at 9 stabbing him and I stay there.  My partner re-positions himself to be at 3 across from me and I do another general and end up at 6 staying there.  My partner then re-positions himself across from me at 12 for the next general that I execute, ending up at 3.  My partner moves across from me to the 9 and I execute a 4th general to end up at 12 again  having moved full circle.

Sometimes we drill all 4 in a rotation, sometimes we just drill 1 of them 4 times. We also will sometimes just drill 2 of them 2x each, etc.  We also tried to bring them alive with each of us actively circling each other and at what ever point we felt was appropriate, executing one of the attacks.  We pulled back from this as it was getting sloppy, but we will be going back to that version soon I hope.

In order to make things more interesting and hit the next level we started doing all of these drills traversing to the left instead of the right on the attacks.  This opened up a whole new world of blade control and combinations that I will talk about more in the realizations section.  With the left traverse option came the ability to tick tock our drills.  What I mean by this is if I am at the 12, I "tick" or traverse right to the 9.  On my next move I "tock" or traverse to the left and end up back at the 12 where I started.

Recently we have also started drilling them with our opponent standing in a more traditional Italian guard (usually Capo Ferro, but also sometimes in an Olympic stance).  Those stances and the blade contact or refusal you get in them is completely different than facing a Spanish opponent.  Also, since there are so few Spanish fencers in our area, we better learn how to fight the opponent in front of us, not the one in our imagination or ideal.

I also practice each of these when alone while visualizing a left handed opponent and I also make an attempt to practice these left handed as well, since I know that I do lose my arm in bouts pretty frequently.

As you can see there are an insane number of combinations and variations that you can encounter with just these 4 general techniques.  If you add in the concepts of medio or distance and when or when not to put in a gaining step, oh my goodness there is no shortage of things to work on.

To summarize some of the drill options:

• Circle and do the 4 generals in various combinations
• Go to the right and the left with these 4 generals (also tick-tock)
• Work against various versions of opponents (Italian guard, left handed, etc.)
• Work all of the drills with the left hand
• Bring the drill alive with both of you circling each other and executing the generals

My realizations:

Recently there have been a number of "aha moments" when doing these drills.  Things that jump out at me and make me simply say "Wow!".  I will try and describe a few of these simple things that were kind of epiphanies to me.

1. A cool concept that is built into the generals, is what I would identify in martial arts terms as "a flow drill".  There is a natural switch point from "line in cross" to weak under strong" since they are both on the outside line.  On the inside there is a switch point between "narrowing" and "weak over strong".  When executing these general you are not doing them in a vacuum.  They are meant to be alive in a fencing bout and executed without thought at a moments notice.  These natural interchanges and options allow you flexibility when your opponent does something you don't expect (which is all of the time).

2. This one might be harder to explain in words, but I will try.  While there is the above switch point between both generals on the outside atajos and both on the inside atajos, there is also a switch point or mirror between an outside and an inside.  Specifically "line in cross" executed on a right traverse, is the same as if you executed "weak over strong" when it is executed on a left traverse (with some exceptions to throwing the opponents blade away in some techniques).  This also goes the same with "narrowing" and "weak under strong" as a pairing.

This might be an experiential exercise, but pretty much, depending on which way you step, which side of the blade you are on you, and what kind of blade control you have, you are provided with multiple options of generals.

3. Distance and medio are everything and they are relative to the individual and the opponent. Many masters have talked about this.  Ettenhard did at length when mentioning how you can not dictate how long a step has to be.

"I consider determining fixed distance for the steps to perform the proposed actions as extremely difficult (and even impossible)." 

Don Franciso Antonio de Ettenhard, Compendium of the foundations of the true Art and Philosophy of Arms (1675)

There are tons of things that go through my head when fencing an opponent, but one that keeps coming to me every time is distance, distance, distance.  It is like in real estate location, location, location.  I have a long blade and a long arm, do I really need that gaining step all of the time?  The answer is no, but I better know how to do it and execute it correctly because there will be times I need it.  Distance...how you close it, how you visualize it, and how you measure it in a fight are essential to how you will be able to execute any of the generals discussed here.


That is about it for now. If there is a take away from this post I would say it is have fun with the 4 general techniques as there is an endless amount of knowledge to be gained from them.

Thanks for reading.

Practice Rundown and Spanish Lessons learned

Hello again,

I know it looks like I haven't posted a blog entry in quite some time, but that isn't really accurate.  I actually spent the past 2 months making MANY edits and improvements to the Destreza resource list (which exploded in hits thanks to AGEA Editora sharing it on their facebook page recently, yay!).  I will continue to keep that up to date and I already have several items in the wings to add for my next round of edits.  I have also been posting practice updates on my G+ page. Still that is no excuse and I am going to use this post as a jumping off point to get back into writing regularly about all of the reading, research, and fencing plans I have been making.

On with last night's practice summary....

First: I started fencing right out of the gate.  I have noticed and mentioned in my practice updates that this is not good for me and I should drill first.  I honestly think I didn't understand why this was the case though and as a sort of mental protest I have continued to ignore the evidence I have gathered on this topic.  Well my first bout this week was with Donovan who to no surprise royally stabbed me in some very educational ways.  The cool thing though was the conversation afterwards where his advice and insights on my fighting made the pieces fall into place and helped me understand not just why I need to drill first, but also where I am in my overall fencing progress.  It was a cool mental thing for me that I am still processing in a very positive way.  

To completely over simplify this epiphany:  

1. Drilling before bouting is my on button and gets me in the right head-space 
2. I am where I should be with all of the study and practice I have been doing

Second:  I got to drilling with Xavier who is my regular Spanish drilling partner.  My goal this week was to slow my drills down because I was getting sloppy in my eagerness to keep developing. To paraphrase a favorite pretentious quote I like: "you can not pull on the stalks in the field to make them grow", lol.  I did slow down in our drills and combined with my recent research and prep into footwork for my Pennsic class, I felt very strong in our "4 generals" drills.  What was also cool is that Xavier has been studying Thibault's material and specifically the circle dimension.  He blocked out circle points on the ground relative to his dimensions and we used that to help us with our drills.  I needed to move into reading more of Thibault's material soon anyway for my research project, so this was a perfect way to get me moving on that.  My homework for next week is to get Thibault's first chapter on dimensions read so we can talk about it more next week.  I also hope, in the next month, to make myself a circle on a tarp for practice purposes.  I am not sure which circle I am going to make, but I am currently favoring Ettenahard's.  No matter which one I pick I think I might end up using Thibault's measurement technique.

Third:, I got a chance to bout with my friend Mac who has been studying Italian fencing and has come real far in the past year with it.  We were purposefully bouting at a slower speed in order to let things from the drilling soak in.  Let me just say it was not pretty in any way lol, but it was a whole lot of fun and exactly what I needed.

The last part of practice I went back to drilling some of the generals as well as running through the Puck drills we got a few weeks back.

Bonus: As a great finish to the evening I went out to dinner with everyone afterwards and had some awesome conversations about the dimensions of Spanish circles as well as the techniques and strategy used.  I am starting to pick up more of the language of Italian fencing which is great to help me understand the similarities and differences between the styles.

Next time: Overall, a great and educational practice.  I will continue along this path next week, but will instead DRILL FIRST, heh.  I will be talking more about circles and dimensions with Xavier and others and there are several folks I really need to get around to fencing.  I also know that one of these days Donovan and I will get back to working through his sickle research... because seriously they are SICKLES, lol.

I will end with a teaser and a kick in the butt to myself.  Expect future topics to include:

• Information on lessons learned from my SCA Arts and Sciences Destreza work
• The footwork and Spanish cirlce class I am teaching at Pennsic in August
• More about the research paper I am working on which deals with how the various historical Destreza masters utilized the circle in their manuals

Thanks for reading,

Spanish Response to Italian Fencing

Hello again,

I am so happy to get around to this post which has been brewing in my head for almost 2 months.  This is going to be a summary of an article that is linked on my resource page that has been so insanely useful to me in putting historical concepts and counters into practice.  This is not a review, but a summary.  My review would be a lot less eloquent and probably be filled with too many useless gushing comments to be helpful to anyone. Hell, his footnotes are just amazing in their own right and lead me down a couple of research roads.  Instead I will summarize most of the Masters covered and let you know what I have put into play so far.

The article is titled:
Que llaman estar nerbado: the Spanish response to the Italian fencing tradition, 1665 - 1714  by Charles Blair  and is located here: Acta Periodica Duellatorum

I am sometimes frustrated with the Spanish authors and how they lack diagrams and pictures that would allow me to visualize their movements.  Also, how I have to wade through so much flowery language and philosophy to get to the heart of what they want me to do.  This article though is what I love about the La Verdadera Destreza (LVD) masters and what I think the Italians do not have access to.  The LVD masters actually spend time telling you not just how to fight in their style, but also how to adapt it to fight an opponent doing something completely different than you are.

If you are practicing Destreza you should READ this article.  I also will reluctantly say that if you are practicing Italian and want to understand what I am potentially going to do against you, READ it.  As my friend Lupold taught me, if the other fencer gets better, it will force me to learn more and improve myself as well.  This article seriously changed my game and pointed me toward some other period masters with some great ideas that I am now investigating farther by researching and reading their manuals.  I credit many of these strategies and concepts with helping me place 4th out of about 70 fighters at the SCA Birka tournament.

Blair organizes the article chronologically and starts off in a slightly later period around 1672 and 1675. It is mentioned how Pacheco's last book contained some material on how to fight the Italian style, but it was written in 1635 and not published until 1672, which was long after his death ca 1640.  During that time the world of fencing had continued to evolve and the practitioners of the art had to rethink his words and figure out their own way of dealing with the competition.  Many of the LVD masters actually contradict each other in terms of their recommendations.   This could be seen as a negative, but instead I think of it as a great thing that simply gives me more options and concepts to potentially apply.

These are the VERY boiled down concepts that I took from the article (along with the works I have further investigated) and what I experienced while implementing them.

Miguel Perez de Mendoza y Quijada (works from 1672, 1675)

• weapons instructor for the Royal family
• says to avoid the opponent's right side (circle to your own right)
• stay profiled
• overall goal is to "break symmetry with one's opponent"
• keep arm straight, point your arm downward towards opponents left side

My take away:  I have now ingrained and trained the need to circle to my right.  God, it was painful and uncomfortable to do, but I now love doing this and it is very effective against the Italian opponents.  I had been trying the straight arm down style, but not to great success. It is a good resting point and I use it occasionally, but more as a transition point. Lastly, staying profiled should be a norm and a basic, so it was good to have this reinforced

Pedro Texedo Sicilia de Teruel (work from 1678)

• goes into  Italian movements and guards that might be used, especially dagger
• talks about how to use your own dagger to defend against the Italian posture "halfway down the body between the center of the chest and the right side of the body... the point of the dagger is raised so that the weak is moved close to the sword arm, about the width of four fingers from the hilt, the point directed at the superior quillion"
• says to lower your own sword arm to match the opponent, point it at the opponent's left eye, stay in LVD stance

My take away:  The dagger information wasn't really a big surprise and is how I usually hold my dagger, but it does go to soundly disprove any of the modern writers of fencing that say true Destreza only uses single sword.  The biggest thing that helped me from his take was how to lower my sword.  This is now regularly my go to stance against Italian as it still gives me the geometric advantage while allowing for more cover.

Alvaro Guerra de la Vega (work from 1681)

• proportionate mean intercepts with atajo
• hold hilt level with the right eye, defending the outside line offering the inside, lowered sword point
• dagger upraised, the quillons not tilting in any direction, treating it like a buckler, pommel over that of the sword
• great quote; "being equally quick, when beginning at the same time, the one who has less to go will arrive more quickly"

My take away:  I am very mixed on this one.  Initially I really like the concepts here, then I found and read a partial translation of the original here: The Association for Renaissance Martial Arts (ARMA)  and was very underwhelmed by the work.  It feels like a sad imitation of the other masters when reading it and was far too general. I will say that Blair seemed to pull more from it than I did and his interpretation was awesome.  Also I learned that apparently de la Vega and Rada were from the same section of Spain (Cantabria)  The reason why this is important is because both author's show very similar techniques in how they hold their swords (hilt up, point down) and also in how they are the only 2 LVD masters to speak about a third medio.  Also, while de la Vega precedes Rada by almost a generation Rada goes into how he invented his posture and stance, when what he describes is precisely the stance that de la Vega illustrates in his manual (see picture from manual I found with LVD on left).  In the end I am just starting to get more familiar with this method of holding the sword and I am using it as an option.

(Plate from orignal de la Vega manual.  LVD person on left also just happens to look a lot like my fellow fencer and friend Remy if he had long hair, even if he is an Italian fencer and probably belongs on the right)




Juan Antonio de Arrieta Arandia y Morentin (work form 1688)

• move your sword restlessly
• raise pommel to the chest

My take away:  This is a very small section, but the idea to have a restless sword has been so insanely priceless.  I was far too stagnant before reading this small passage and it has changed how I use Destreza.

Francisco Lorenz de Rada (works from 1695 and 1705)

• describes the stance which sounds a lot like the one shown above by de la Vega
• also gives an option of reducing the height and opening the feet to match the opponent
• goes into how to hold the dagger in front of body, hand and half foot in front, little portion of the dagger over the sword arm, point raised to top of superior quillon of the sword, with shell facing opponent

My take away:  I am just starting to experiment with Rada's sword guard.  Honestly I will probably come back to this again and get more from it as I start working through Romagnan's book which goes much more in depth into Rada's style.

Francisco Antonio de Ettenhard y Abarca (work from 1697)

• Blair gushes on about Ettenhard similar to how I would about this paper, making me sad that I have only ever found a partial translation of this work
• Ettenhard praises the Italians, but of course goes on to how great the Spanish must be as a result
• general concepts on why Spanish is greater based on movement efficiency
• profile to their square
• dagger closes the line of attack and sword held diagonally
• says you must learn how all people fight to know how to counter them
• always work in second intention
• best paraphrase award: "he admits that the precepts he has proposed against the Italian manner of fighting might seem impossible, yet this is not so, except for the timid and lazy"

My take away:  Again another section I think I will have to reread to absorb more of.  The biggest change for me from this section came with the concept of needing to work in second intention.  I knew I had to bull fight more and show patience, but it really didn't soak in until after I read this section funny enough.


Blair also touches on very briefly Nicolas Tamariz who he says little of other than his work is based off of Rada and a Neopolitan duke named Giuseppe d'Alessandro who has a few things to say about how the Spanish fight, but nothing I need to cover here.

He finishes off the paper with a great section on Ethical Considerations of period and how it relates to Spanish fencing.  Again nothing on how to counter, but just rich with awesome ideas and societal context.


To summarize the main take homes that changed my Italian counter game the most from these masters:

• circle to the right (Mendoza)
• lower arm to match opponent and point sword at their left eye (Texedo)
• restless blade (Arrieta)
• work in second intention more (Ettenhard)
• don't be timid and lazy and know that this stuff will work if I do it more (Ettenhard)
• try the hanging guard of Rada and de La Vega at least as a transition and option

I am constantly adapting my game and integrating more as I experiment with and learn more period concepts.  There is a reason this style of fighting stayed around and people were writing about it from 1582 until well into the early to mid 1800's and that is it worked.

Thanks for reading.

The Spanish Circle Through the Years

RECENT UPDATES

July 26, 2018; Added a circle from Manuel Antonio de Brea (1805), Added an additional Thibault plate with more detail and on where to find more; Moved older updates to the bottom section. 

INTRODUCTION

Hello again,

My hope was to make this post about a summary of a wonderful article on Spanish counters to Italian fencing that I have been reading and using recently. (update, I eventually made that post and it is located here.) Instead I mentally made a left turn today and ended up spending multiple hours researching the Spanish circle and thought I would share that with you.

The circle in Destreza is not a simple thing to describe, yet it is also not as complex as some of the masters make it out to be. You can get dizzy looking at some of the interpretations that, while beautiful, are pretty intense (see Thibault's or Rada's circles below).   The Spanish circle is not supposed to be an actual circle on the ground in which you fight, but you will see them on the ground now and again to be used for training purposes.  It is instead intended to be a mental construct that the Diestro uses when fencing to help them navigate geometry, distance, and angles to command not only himself, but his adversary.

Maestro Ramon Martinez has a series of articles on this if you are interested in reading more about the Demystification of the Spanish School located here: Martinez Academy of Arms

The circles below are from 11 different masters and span over 223 years of La Verdadera Destreza manuals.  I say "over" because Carranza's manuscript was first published in 1569 to a small audience, so in truth we are looking at 236 years of work in the same style and fencing tradition.  Some, like Carranza, had a very small number of drawings in their treatises.  Others, like Thibault and Rada, had a large variety of figures and circles within their work to demonstrate the art and the movements.

THE MASTERS

The masters and the years the included circles are from are as follows:

                                            Don Jeronimo de Carranza                   (1569 / 1582)

                                            Don Luis Pacheco de Narvaez               (1600) - 2 circles

                                            Gerard Thibault d'Anvers                     (1630) - 2 circles

                                            Luis de Viedma                                       (1639)

                                            Don Francisco de Ettenhard                  (1675)

                                            Miquel Perez de Mendoza y Quijada    (1675) 
                                            Don Pedro Texedo Sicilia de Teruel      (1678)

                                            Alvaro Guerra de la Vega                      (1681)
                                            Don Nicolas Tamariz                              (1696)

                                            Don Francisco Lorenz de Rada             (1705) - 4 circles

                                            Manuel Antonio de Brea                        (1805)

THE CIRCLES

Here are the circles (in chronological order) that I pulled from the period manuals and treatises:

• Carranza’s circle from: De La Filosophia de las Armas y de Su Destreza y la Aggression y Defensa Cristiana  (1582)
• (The treatise of the Philosophy of Arms and of the true Skill and of the aggression and defense of Christianity)
• One of only 6 fencing related drawings in his treatise, but it is also the foundation for Destreza.

• Don Louis Pacheco de Navarez’s circle from: Libro de las grandezas de la espada (1600)
• (Book of the Greatness of the Sword)
• The center circle (obviously not to scale with the footprints) with the square in it is what I am referencing here.

• Don Louis Pacheco de Navarez’s circle from: Libro de las grandezas de la espada (1600)
• (Book of the Greatness of the Sword)
• Another version of Pacheco's circle that give more detail and also makes the addition of letters around the outside to help the reader navigate the circle

• Gerard Thibault’s circle from: Adademie de l’Espee (1630)
• (Academy of the Sword) 
• As I mentioned it is beautiful, yet intense.  This is the smaller circle plate from his book.
• He goes into details on how to construct the circle and how the size is determined by the measurements of the fencer

• Gerard Thibault’s circle from: Adademie de l’Espee (1630)
• (Academy of the Sword) 
• Another more detailed plate.  You can find a great web source for this and other Thibault plates at a Memory of the Netherlands site by clicking HERE

• Luis de Viedma circle from: Metodo de Ensenanza de Maestros (1639)
• (Method of Teaching of Masters)
• This is also the circle I recreated myself and documented that process here: Creation of a La Verdadera Destreza Training Circle

• Don Francisco Antonio de Ettenhard’s circle from: Compendio de los fundamentos de la verdadera destreza, y de la filosofia de las armas (1675)
• (Compendium of the foundations of the true art and philosophy of arms)
• Puck and Mary Curtis did a partial translation of this manual and that is located here: Destreza Translation and Research Project

• Miquel Perez de Mendoza y Quijada circle from: Resumen de la verdadera destreza de las armas en treinta y ocho aserciones: Resumidas, y advertidas con demonstraciones Practicas, deducido de las obras principales que tiene escritas su Autor (1675)
• This circle was verified and published on a blog run by the rare books curator from Princeton University. You can find the original blog post here: "Notabilia"   The university seems to have a wonderful collection of historical fencing manuals.  Some of them can be found on-line and a list of their historical and modern manuals are located here: Princeton University Library
• I really enjoy the vast amount of information on this page, which includes basic geometry on the left and bottom, body / sword positions at the top, as well as circles with foot work in the center.

• Don Pedro Texedo circle from: Escuela de principiantes y promptuario de questiones en la philosophia de la berdadera destreça de las Armas en que ban resumidas con demostraciones practicas... (1678)
• I have found other pictures from Texedo with fencers using this circle with both rapier and dagger allowing for a better idea of perspective within the movements. Sadly no translations of his work yet, except within Charles Blair's paper on the Spanish response to the Italian Style.  I give a detailed summary of that paper if you click here.

• Alvara Guerra de la Vega circle from: Comprension de la Destreza. (1681)
• Sadly this is a poor copy of his circle, but it does give a general idea of another master's work.
• He reportedly comes from the same part of Spain as Rada and Blair also goes into his work in his article on the Spanish response to Italian.  This master and Rada are reportedly the only masters to refer to a 3rd medio in their work (proportional measure or medio proporcional).

• Don Nicolas Tamariz's circle from: Cartilla y Luz en La Verdadera Destreza. (1696)
• This is 1 of only 2 diagrams in all 205 pages of this treatise, which is not that unusual for most of the Spanish manuals.

 

• Don Franciso Lorez de Rada’s circles from: Experiencia del instrumento armigero espada: libro tercero. (1705)
• There are several pages from Rada that I am posting that shows the variety of his circles
• If you are interested in exploring the Rada style of fencing I really recommend Sebastien Romagnan's book here: Destreza, Historical Fencing

• Rada continued, same resource as above
• It shows how the circles of you and your adversary intersect

• Don Franciso Lorez de Rada’s circles from: Nobleza de la espada, evyo splendor se expressa en tres libros segun ciencia, arte y experiencia, Vol. 3 (1705)
• This is from a different Rada manuscript and is probably the best example I have found of the multiple circles within Destreza. You can clearly see the greater circle that is shared as well as the minor circles around each of the fencers.  

• Don Franciso Lorez de Rada’s circles from: Nobleza de la espada (1705)
• Here is another one from a different book of Rada's that I am including because it seriously just made me say WTF.
• I actually think I see what he is getting at here, but then again there is a very good chance that I am staring at it too hard like those white noise hidden pictures from the 80's/ early 90's .... look a sailboat.

• Manuel Antonio de Brea's circle from: Principios Universales Y Reglas Generales De La Verdadera Destreza Del Espadin: Segun La Doctrina Mixta De Francesa, Italiana Y Española (1805)
• A late period circle that I wanted to link to show how some of these lasted in fencing manuals for hundred's of years.

My previous hope was realized when I used many of these circles to teach a class on Spanish footwork and circle strategy at Pennsic 45. My lesson plan for that class is located at: Lesson Plan for LVD: Spanish Fencing Circle Use and Footwork .

Thank you for reading

PREVIOUS UPDATES

November 29, 2016; Added a circle from Miguel Perez de Mendoza y Quijada; Added titles to each of the sections: Recent Updates, Introduction, The Masters, The Circles, and Previous Updates; Moved older updates to the bottom section. 
November 23, 2016; Added a circle of Don Nicolas Tamariz
October 16, 2016;  Added circles from: Pacheco, Texedo, Viedma, Alvaro Guerra de la Vega, and Rada.  Also added a master list after the introduction and a number of links to my other posts.  Since this was first posted in January '16 I used a number of these in a class I taught this past summer at Pennsic 45. 
As I find additional circles and resources I will add them and make updates similar to the way I do on the LVD Resource List

More Bull Fighting and Less Running with The Bulls

“It’s one thing to understand the Arms and another to be a skilled man.”

Don Jeronimo Carranza

     Hello there!  This post will be a reflection with lessons learned from the Barony Beyond the Mountain (BBM) Yule rapier tourney I entered last weekend.  Let me start by saying that I am extremely happy that I went to this SCA event and entered the tourney.  I placed 5th and learned some important things in the process.

     The quote above seemed pretty appropriate in regards to the tourney for me.  Most of the time in his treatise when Carranza refers to “The Skill” he is talking about the actual practice of Verdadera Destreza.  He continues the quote above with, 

“A skilled man is he who is practiced in the practical aspects of the Arms 
or in things of the practical nature.” 

When he talks about “Arms” he refers more to the study of the theory of the practice.  I have been trying to balance these two studies recently and the tourney was a great chance for me to see how my skill is coming along.  So enough philosophy, here are my take home points: 

•      It was NOT a hybrid, it was Verdadera Destreza
•      A bad tournament mind can mess with you
•      Everything I do with the Right, I must do with the Left
•      Bonus lesson: Hand hits and sword hilts

     Last week before the tourney I mentioned at practice and on G+ that I was going to speed up my fencing for the tourney and that it would be a hybrid of my Destreza and my athletic/previous martial skill.   After putting it into action and some reflection I realized that wasn’t accurate.   What I put into use was far from perfect Destreza, since I am new to this, but it was the "Skill" and the moves I have been drilling for the past few months sped up and without conscious thought.   I was using the footwork, angles, and arm positioning as well as some basic combat theory.  What I realized is that if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it can be called 100% beginner Destreza, heh.  I now intend to go back to my footwork and technique drills and continue fighting folks slower and more intentionally, as I have been doing at practice, to ingrain the muscle memory more. Probably three quarter speed is my guess based on what the sped up moves feel like.  At the suggestion of a friend I will be speeding it up to tourney rate about once a month to see how the skills are porting over and being incorporated at full speed.  I do believe after watching the Puck and Romagnan bouts again that I need to slow down my tourney pace a bit and treat those full speed fights more as bull fights and less as a running with the bulls.

     I have been in a number of rapier as well as martial arts tournaments before and I can honestly say that headspace has never been a problem for me.  Last week was very humbling, as part way through I went up against some very good fencers who had my number and it messed with my mind in the moment.  Thanks to a bout that had me laughing hysterically (thank you Sorcha) and some good people, I was able to get out of it before the tourney ended.  Afterwards I did some reflection on how I ended up there, so I could avoid it in the future. I realized that in my previous tourneys I went into them without anything to lose and to paraphrase Aikido founder Morihei Ueshiba, I was practicing with fierce joy.  This time around I was went into the tourney after months and months of practicing a new style and art.  I was truly wondering and some might say worried if I had wasted all of that time on something that wouldn’t actually work.  My mind got messed up in that moment when I started counting my fights won/lost as if those mattered.  The good news is I got out of it and my training did work and pay off.  Lesson learned that going forward I shouldn’t count my bouts at all and simply put, I should fight with more joy. 

     This next one isn’t as deep as the first points, but pretty important.  During the tourney I lost my right hand a number of times and when I switched to my left I was practically useless and as good as dead.  I am doing a few things to fix this.  1.  I need to think about my arm and hand position when I am fighting, 2. I am changing out my rig/hilt and going back to my first ring hilt which has more coverage than the clam shell I have been using, and 3. I have started drilling all of my techniques and footwork in my left hand as well.  Thanks to my arnis and previous martial training I am quite ambidextrous.  All of my standard warm up and technique drills are now going to be done on both sides.  Ta da! Let’s hope that works and is as easy as the paragraph sounds.  I am thinking it won’t be quick, but it should work.

     Bonus thoughts and research:  Getting my hand and forearm hit made me start to ponder the hilts/guards used most popularly within Spanish fencing and why.  Specifically the use of the cup hilt which adds more protection.  My very loose theory is that the development of the cup hilt and it popularly being known as the “Spanish cup hilt” could be directly related to Destreza and the stance that relies largely on the hand being held so far out.  Some evidence shows that they gained use (early to mid 17th century) at the same time that Destreza rose to popularity in Spain.  Yes, there are Italian cup hilts out there.  From what I found in a quick poke is that many of them are from northern Italy, which isn’t that far from Spain.  I also know that some Italian styles do have extended guards, such as Giganti if I remember correctly.  This is all a theory right now that I am starting to research and work out.  We will see if it turns into an A & S thing in the future, but either way I am finding all of it very interesting.

     Next post will be more philosophy as well as some reflections on the amazing Sebastien Romagnan Destreza book I just got in the mail and I am starting to read through.  You can find the link on my Destreza Resource page, but here it is again:  Destreza, Historical Fencing.

Thanks for reading.