Posts: 547
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
14
Thank you Brian... I enjoyed your video.
Posts: 44
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
0
As i allready commented on youtube:
Great video
I have to get me a training pole for my yard ;-)
Posts: 315
Threads: 20
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
0
First I commend you for the very good effort, so please consider the following as constructive criticism.
Also note that I am not as familiar with military iconography as I am with Gladiatorial iconography, so I might be wrong in some cases.
1. Concerning the basic stance:
1. You actually do not need as many variations in the basic stance (or setup as you call them) as you give.
All attacks can made from a position with the Gladius grip held at about hip level and the point either straight to the front or pointing up slightly.
This would be your "midline thrust position", concerning the position of hand and blade, but I would consider your "low line thrust position" the basic stance concerning the bend of the legs and body.
In your mid line and high line basic stances your neck and face are quite exposed to thrusts and missile weapons, while in your low line crouched positions you have the perfect coverage of the the Scutum from nose to ankle.
In Gladiator iconography of the Republican period, while open faced helmets were used, the Scutum or Parmula is always held so the eyes can just glance over the rim.
Only after full face protection was introduced, the shields were held lower with the brim now covering the lower edge of the visor at the height of the neck.
So the basic stance would be your low line stance combined with your mid line arm position.
The Gladius on top of the Scutum stance would be useful in close order, though I cannot remember ever seeing it in iconography.
The Gladius behind shield variation is useful in a duel situation, where you want to keep your target hidden until the last minute.
2. Thrusting with a vertical blade and straight extension only makes sense if your opponent is totally defenceless, and even then it is better to thrust with a horizontal blade.
Turning the wirst while thrusting so that the blade is horizontally to the ground on impact is used in medieval as well as early modern fencing manuals.
It has the benefit of letting the blade slip in between the ribs as opposed to be stopped by them on attacks to the chest.
Also the blade is more difficult to push aside if you hold it in tierce (nails down - for thrusts to the left side of the opponent) or quart (nails up - for thrusts to the right side of the opponent).
Should you be of target with your thrust, you can easily convert the thrust into a sideways chop or drawing cut, as the blade is already in the plane where you can apply it to the neck, arm, chest, thigh...
On thrusts to the neck and face, which I would consider the default attack against an armored opponent carrying a shield, the horizontal plane of your blade also allows the blade to slip in between the shield edge and helmet a lot more easily then the vertical position.
A straight thrust is of little use when facing an opponent using a shield to cover his body. So when doing the thrusts you would move your arm more to the outside, angling the point inward, trying to bypass the edge of the shield.
When thrusting to the left shoulder over the upper edge of the shield you have to turn the wrist even further to bring the nails outward and the edge vertical again, point downwards. This way, even when you miss the shoulder, you can apply a draw cut against the back of the opponent.
3. When doing pellwork you have to move your upper body more, not only stabbing from the arm, but also from the hip rotation and gaining further reach and power by straightening the left leg, bending forward a bit.
I am not sure how footwork would have worked in a battle line formation, but Vegetius does mention springing in and moving out of range under cover of the Scutum.
Olaf Küppers - Histotainment, Event und Promotion - Germany
Posts: 57
Threads: 12
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
Olaf....thanks for your input....i really don't look at it as constructive criticism but added finer points to things that i may have missed or failed to explain in the video. The video is NOT supposed to be the Definitive Work on Gladius Training...it is just my own self-study interpretations of things....All of your points are bang on correct...thanks again
Posts: 57
Threads: 12
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
What are your thoughts on the Right leg forward stance instead of the traditional left leg forward bracing the shield stance? I know the "right leg" stance has some drawbacks but what situations would it have been used?
Posts: 79
Threads: 4
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation:
0
You're locking up the shield and not using it to the fullest by having the right leg forward as you mentioned, however as legionnaires were typically right-handed, you would increase the range of a thrust or cut. When a martial artist punches, rear punches or crosses aren't typically very powerful unless you advance at the same time, transitioning to an increase in range and power from the now lead hand/leg. In a stationary or defensive position, a thrust or cut with the rear arm tucked back loses both range and power. Thus with your right leg forward you have a bit more advantage in a strike. Whether it's worth it compared to bracing you shield, however, I'm not so certain about. You can always give it a try on the pell and see if you notice and difference.
-Quintus Claudius Britannicus
-Ryan
-Cave a sinistra manu utebatur pro bellator.
