More Reading

[arthwollipot]

So I've been spending time more recently reading George Silver's Paradoxes of Defence, a work which is usually dismissed as a long-winded assault on the Italian rapier masters - which it is - but the actual content regarding English swordsmanship is frequently ignored. He does go into more detail in his Brief Instructions Upon My Paradoxes Of

Comments

[politas]

"Cobb's Traverse" I like that. It's a great name.

Whereas Silver points out that the blow is just as fast as the thrust, and is more likely to inflict grievous injury on its target.

I'm not certain that Silver is correct on that point. I think a thrust is faster than a blow, unless you have taken up a position where your point is aiming away from your opponent, which I think most people would agree is an unusual stance, and one designed more to draw one's opponent into commitment than to be ready for a fast strike. A thrust also requires less recovery to prepare for repetition than a blow. You never have to deal with pendulum movement.

If Silver relies strongly on blows rather than thrusts, it is no wonder that he finds a shorter sword to be superior. In a swinging match, the shorter pendulum allows faster recovery.

[arthwollipot]

unless you have taken up a position where your point is aiming away from your opponent, which I think most people would agree is an unusual stance, and one designed more to draw one's opponent into commitment than to be ready for a fast strike

Actually, it happens all the time. You woudn't adopt such a stance to open a fight with, but in the course of the fight you are always finding yourself with your point off target.