Charron test cutting

[Bart Walczak]

Bob,

It's good to know that you explore the issue of how easily it is to cut with a sword. We need that kind of knowledge too, after all one doesn't want to overextend if his strike doesn't connect. And yet he wants to strike with the whole bodyweight behind it, so finding the equilibrum - striking hard enough, fast enough, and accurately enough is what makes a good swordsman.

I think enough is the key word which many of us forget, and it leaves us with "striking hard, fast and accurately" <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

So, I think we should now embrace the word enough and seek what it means for each of us.

Have fun
Bart

[Guest]

Hi everyone,

While I have not read the entire thread in depth, and have only skimmed all of the replies, I thought I would add a little disclaimer to Bob's cutting.

The cutting for the first four videos was not at a seminar Bob was teaching, it was at a small get-together at Albion, with Peter Johnsson, Albion, and the St. Martin's group.

If Bob was using caution, it was due to the fact that the swords were the Albion/PJ Museum Line prototypes, and belonged to Albion not Bob. Bob, along with myself, was also cutting with Peter's recreation of the Sture, which is his own personal sword, so I think the discretion Bob used was called for. And for anyone who was wondering, the targets were double and triple mat rolls of wara purchased from Bugei.

If I have stepped on any toes here, I'm sorry, but I just wanted some of the background details to be known, before anyone formed any opinions.

Thanks,
Jason Dingledine
Albion Armorers/Filmswords
Resistance is Futile

[Bob Charron]

Stacy,

I don't know if any video was available or who took pictures. I couldn't carry off cutting and taking video at the same time
I mentioned the single pass in which I did not move my feet to illustrate the effect of the approach *even* in this circumstance.

John,

The quote you used is a good one, but does not have any bearing on this situation. I didn't move before the cut, *and* I didn't move after the cut, therefore I did not violate the quoted master's preference for avoiding movement after the cut.

And of course it adds power to step with the cut, and I did several of these as well. Cutting was very easy when this was done.

To always step with the cut is to miss much within Fiore's teachings. The three movements of the sword which he describes include not stepping, passing and pivoting. You do not always step. This is well within the parameters of the system I am studying. Even if a German master disagreed with Fiore, it would only be relevant as a footnote.

[Bob Charron]

Todd,

I will not get into the politics of sword manufacturing, as that would be quite ill-considered of me. I am friends with all these people and get along with them quite fine. They seem to get along fine with each other. I'm not going to endanger that in any way.

I have handled a couple of original pieces that certainly were authentic, in the basements of museums in the presence of the curator. I noted how they handled (preferring Ewart Oakshott's approach to sword appreciation, as my knowledge of this complicated and noble science is beyond my ken).

Suffice it to say that I very much liked and appreciated the sword-maker's craft in both of these swords, and since the one I bought from Gus was *the* prototype, I know very few have seen his newest work.

I would advise that all of us remain open-minded and cordial, as I saw Peter Johnson, Craig Johnson, Tinker, and Gus Trim all do in Racine. It was marvelous and productive. Let's contribute to that instead.

[Bob Charron]

Bart,

Well said. I will keep that in mind, as it does seem to be the statement of unecessary extremes that get us *all* in to trouble

All the best,

[John_Clements]

Bob wrote: "To always step with the cut is to miss much within Fiore's teachings. The three movements of the sword which he describes include not stepping, passing and pivoting."

I'm not following.
Are you saying you stand still when you strike???

[Tony_Indurante]

To always step with the cut is to miss much within Fiore's teachings. The three movements of the sword which he describes include not stepping, passing and pivoting. You do not always step. This is well within the parameters of the system I am studying. Even if a German master disagreed with Fiore, it would only be relevant as a footnote.

Bob, could you expound on Fiore's 3 movements of the sword? Maybe in a new thread.

General question to all- Do you think that you would cut differently if you were test cutting just to cut stuff as opposed to if you were doing it to see how the cuts transition and work against an opponent? Different intentions require different mindsets and produce different results.

[Randall Pleasant]

Bart

The question that none of us can answer ahead of time is "How much strength will be enough so that our cut is effective on a target that is covered in cloth and/or mail, is moving, and is attempting to displace our blade and cut us at the same time. Within the context stated above I thing "enough" can only be set at the point where we do not over extend ourselves during a cut.

[Bob Charron]

John,

Exactly.

In the volta stabile, without moving one's feet you may play in front and in back one one side. It is one of the movements of the sword in Fiore. There is also meza volta done with a passing step, and tutta volta done with a circular step.

Tony,

I hope that answers your question as well.

[Brian Hunt]

Bob,

Volta stabile is the turn where you face the other direction 90' from your orginal one on the balls of your feet, right? I just want to be sure I remember correctly. Essentially it is a step that isn't a step, right? <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" />

Brian Hunt.

[Bart Walczak]

Ran:

True. This is why we need to experiment, don't we? Isn't it what Bob has done?

The problem I see is that sometimes when one says: "Hey you can *also* cut effortlessly and it will work too", people understand it as: "You should *always* cut with little power". Which is a problem with communication, and a real waste of energy and time to explain and breeds unnecessary conflicts.

This pertains to many other issues, not only this thread.

[Bob Charron]

Brian,

Yes. The pivot on the feet can be done while continuing to face the same direction or by changing the direction you face if there are multiple opponents. The body and knees are involved.

You can also stand in dente di cenghiaro and simple raise the sword through a sottana using the properties of the sword to assist you. This is the most subtle version of the volta stabile, while changing the direction your facing is the most developed version, so to speak.

[Guest]

Bart, I'm sure that as scientist you would agree with me on :"there is no such thing as just cutting". We have to take into condideration many aspects of the wepon and the target, I think that some targets are cut better without putting too much weight into the cut, but relying on speed of movement instead, knife work tells me so. I'm talking about light targets that have a light or medium consistency, like paper, cords, plastic bottles ( <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> ) umprotected necks, bellies etc... Here you want very accurate blade contact, a good slicing action and less momentum that might move the target away from the cut.
However some other targets require momentum to be cut effectively, wood, armored heads and breasts etc... It is not a case if skull and breast cuts are not recommended with spadroons, while neck and "sun does not go there" cuts are, because spadroons cut fast but not with much weight (they should still work on legs). On the contrary it would seem that claymores were used against skulls with great results, with genuine colpi di villano <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />.
So, as long as the discussion is about cutting and strenght it is vague... and everyone is right in some way <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
Carlo

[Bob Charron]

Bart,

Again you make an excellent point. Someone noticed a video and brought it to the attention of folks on this forum. Then someone had to say there was something wrong with the cutting, the sword, the target, or the cutter, because it looked too easy.

A cut may manifest itself in many ways. One may be startled, one may be in a "temperate choler" as Viggiani advocates, one may be entirely intellectual and analytical and cool while cutting. There are a myriad of options and expressions. The cuts may be done stepping, not stepping, etc.

In the end it seems we make mistakes when we express things in extremes, or view others as expressing things in extremes, or cannot reconcile a different manifestation with an idea that is rooted in an extreme.

In the end the truth will come from the Medieval and Renaissance masters, and experimenting with their ideas until we can reproduce them physically exactly as they say. Every time I have been wrong it is because I did not understand them correctly.

In this case the proper cutting mechanic for Fiore's system is laid out in Fiore's treatise. It just takes time and effort to discover it.

[John_Clements]

Hey Tony
That's a good question.
Yes, I do think many peopel test cut differently than they would in combat. This has been a criticism of some esoteric schools of kenjutsu that do the very ritualized test (and artificial) cutting many of us have seen. They move up slowly to the target, do the ritual draw, hold ths pose, make a single artistic slash, then step away slow, and everyone claps as they resheath, etc.
Whereas, in combat your opponent would be moving, and you would need to approach and cut from any number of ranges and angles quickly and immediately.
Hank R. use to bring this concern up at his test cuttings, and in our Houston class we charge targets and make strong, rapid, multiple cuts to note that not all of them hit or are successful. That's why you practice. No ritual necessary.