|
|
|
| ||||||
| ||||||
|
I ussually stay out of this kind of stuff, but this caught my eye. If we break up the "sword" into the early medieval cutting swords {type X, XI, and XII} and the later cut and thrust swords {type XVIII and subtypes}, I think you'd find that the usages would be closer between the early swords and sabers, than you would find at times with the early swords, and the later swords. Correct me if I'm wrong, but sabers started out as cavalry weapons, whose strength is cutting action against unarmored, or lightly armored foes. Hmm, the type XI is more of a cavalry weapon whose strength is cutting action against unarmored, or lightly armored foes. The type X and XII's are more versatile, but still are mainly cutting swords. The early medieval swords were meant to be used with a parrying weapon, shields ussually. The early saber was meant to be used with a parrying weapon, shield ussually. These types of weapons, before compound hilts, were light, averaging 2lbs or less. The biggest difference is the single edge, and curved blade of the saber. Despite reputation, the saber isn't necessarily the better cutter. I think you'd find that most saber techniques would work well with the earlier cutting swords. Both with a parrying weapon and without. The big difference in use, is that most sabers would be better at thrusting. And frankly, I'm not so sure that the better cut and thrust swords couldn't be used using saber techniques. Oh yeah, some of the more subtle things, using the curve of the blade might not cross reference, but..... In cutting practice, there is very little difference in application between the sword and the saber. In thrusting practice, with a moving target {speeding pizza box}, the big thing is getting a feel of the sword {or saber}, otherwise there is very little difference.
|
||
| Follow Ups | ||
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Post Followup | ||