In mid-2011 I began training to face the Chicago Swordplay Guild’s John O’Meara. He’s explosively fast, tall, skilled, and he uses Fabris which is a very good book.
At this time the Italian rapier practitioners seemed unstoppable and successful examples of Spanish Fencing against high level Italian practitioners were rare. Certainly there wasn’t much on YouTube and the understanding when you fence at the WMAW gala is that within a day your fencing will be watched, scrutinized, and perhaps praised or criticized for years to come. It’s a high-pressure situation.
Knowing this was coming and knowing that we wanted to represent the tradition well I worked with and trained with my two friends and classical Italian Maestri, Eric Myers and Kevin Murakoshi. (Unknown to me John O’Meara had also been training and had worked with Charles Blair to train a local fencer of my height and relative fencing profile as best they could as an analog of what John would be fencing against.)
In secret, both of us trained against the other for 3 months. Friendships and memories are made from such as these.
In order to train we applied the True School Destreza tradition in its purest form; as a theoretical science to guide training. What are the causes that form John’s fight? What are the causes that form mine? Knowing these things can we form a training plan that will allow us to beat (or at least touch) an adversary with greater reach, a longer weapon, and a broader community in which train?
We broke John down into causes and patterns and then from these we created a training tree. (Which I have shared below.)
The fight is presented here:
Did we succeed? I’m not the person to answer that with any certainty but I think we demonstrated that someone practicing La Verdadera Destreza can compete well against a top level Italian fencer. It’s my hope that no viewer thinks I intend to represent all of the tradition and, if you view the tree below, you can see it’s an abbreviated subset of the tradition tuned for this adversary.
Is it perfect? Certainly not. Looking at it now I would have preferred my footwork to be more active and I would have hoped to have been aware enough of my surroundings to see the bit of ice that had fallen off the table which created a slippery surface. It’s too much of a burden for any one person to present themselves as the sole representation of the tradition and it’s not something I would try to claim. It was fencing within its time and I see both good and bad, but it served its purpose in that moment.
With love and affection for my friend John, I share this advice on how to fence against him (and perhaps many other Italians as well)
John O’Meara vs. Puck Curtis – Decision Tree
Inside Line
Atajo Inside
Adversary does nothing
Attack with half reverse, transverse right, and Atajo again
Or attack by thrust with transverse left
Adversary attacks by disengagement
Convert the adversary’s attack into a Line in cross with transverse right
Or place an Atajo on the outside
Adversary uses movement of increase to attempt to take Atajo inside
Yield into circular reverse with a movement of conclusion and footwork left
Invite with the Right Angle on the Inside
Adversary attacks with engagement
Yield into circular reverse with a movement of conclusion and footwork left
Adversary attacks without engagement
Place an Atajo over the attack
Use a circular reverse (like a Narrowing) to pick up the attack while stepping left (either counterattacking or just attacking the adversary’s weapon)
Outside Line
Atajo Outside
Adversary does nothing
Attack with half cut, transverse left, and Atajo again
Or attack by thrust by glide
Adversary attacks by disengagement
Convert the adversary’s attack with narrowing and transverse left
Or place an Atajo on the inside
Adversary uses movement of increase to attempt to take Atajo outside
Yield into circular cut with a movement of conclusion and footwork right
Invite with the Right Angle on the Outside
Adversary attacks with engagement
Yield into circular cut with a movement of conclusion and footwork right
Adversary attacks without engagement
Place an Atajo over the attack
Use a circular reverse (like a Narrowing) to pick up the attack while stepping left (either counterattacking or just attacking the adversary’s weapon)
One of the elements I see as key to the success of the atajo is that we should be leading the atajo with the tip such that the point crosses over the opposing steel first.
“Arriving, then, to the perfect formation of the atajo, it should necessarily consist of three movements, violent, offline lateral [remiss] and natural: with the first the sword that should subject is placed on a superior plane to the other: with the second it is placed transversal over it: and with the other it subjects it…”
~Pacheco
That concept of pointing into the opponent’s weapon is consistent with what the Italians were doing in the late 1500s and early 1600s but it’s different from what we see today in most modern sport fencing schools which are heavily influenced by the French smallsword tradition that developed much later. The French will parry leading the movement with the blade’s strong while the point lags to maintain the point in presence (on target) by bending at the wrist in the lateral plane. That sacrifices defensive power in favor of the faster riposte. Specifically, it does not entirely close the path to target and it exposes the fencer parrying point-in-presence to a forced glide which can be done in a single movement.
French Foil from Ricardo E. Manrique’s Fencing Foil Class Work Illustrated from left to right (p. 22, 21, 19 respectively)
Note that in this image of the engagement the line to the fencers head is still partially open.
What do I mean by a forced glide?
First we need to consider a strong angle versus a weak angle.
When the tip of the parrying weapon is pointed into the threat to lead the parry it creates an inclined plane at the point of engagement. This inclined plane guides resistant and opposing force into the strong of your weapon like a slide or ramp. We might call this a ‘strong angle’ between the swords because it makes you stronger as the adversary pushes into the defense (but it also removes the point from presence meaning your riposte takes longer).
A weak angle between the swords is also an inclined plane but in this case it guides resistant and opposing force into the weak of your weapon like a slide or ramp. The weak angle keeps your point in presence but allows the adversary to change the degrees of strength easily by pressing into your weapon along the sliding surface in a direct path to the target.
A weak angle versus a strong angle
Demonstration\Exercise
By that reasoning, a forced glide is a thrust which pushes through the weak angle or engagement. It’s easy to try with a friend to get a sense of what I am talking about. If we know the requirements to form an atajo, can you form an atajo leading with the strong and keeping the point in presence? I don’t think so but we can make a study of this with friends and blades in hand.
Your friend will present the right angle but when you place the atajo your partner will push with a mixed movement lateral and forward into your weapon attempting to bring the point onto target. If you place atajo with the strong angle your partner’s blade will slide along the blade to drop into your strong but if you place the weak angle your partner’s blade slide toward your weak and the adversary becomes stronger in the bind such that your defense will collapse opposed by a single mixed movement.
If that is the demonstration it is the first evidence that the atajo is formed with the point out of presence in a very Carrancine sort of way. We can create a test, we can demonstrate it, and the results are reproducible.
What do the books say?
Is there more evidence? Yes, the authors give us good descriptions.
When he describes the atajo in detail Pacheco gives us the requirements, shows us the defensive atajo, the offensive atajo, and then the ideal atajo. The union of these gives us an infinity of possible atajos but that infinite set is bounded by the requirements. If you consider the defensive and offensive atajos as still valid extremes the ideal formation of the atajo seems to become a Medio; a virtuos middle between extremes which is mindfully chosen for best effect.
Defensive
The defensive atajo turns the point into the adversary’s weapon to cross at right angles. It is the most defensive power you can generate and is great for defeating powerful cuts from a heavier sword. The interior angle is 90 degrees.
“…and he will place atajo on the sword cutting it in right angles (as it appears in the demonstration that we put) without it being necessary to communicate too much force for the subjection, because the distance will compensate for this inadvisability: and the imagined line from the toe of his right foot, will also cut in right angles that of the diameter that had been common,…”
~Pacheco
Offensive
The offensive atajo reduces the interior angle as much as possible. That’s a judgment call so how much angle is that? If you look at the requirements, the key requirement here is that the line must be closed and parallel blades do not cross and that cannot close the line. It must be an angle greater than 0 degrees in the interior angle. We know that Pacheco also tells us the thrust that follows will be a mixed movement forward and aligning [reduction] to bring the point back into presence.
“He will have the arm completely extended, without making an angle in the sangradera, and that which he had between him and his body the least acute that he will be able to, so that the violent movement be smaller, when he executes the strike: The hand does not share any extreme of fingernails up or down, it is on edge so that straightly it can receive the strength of the arm, and communicate it, in this way to his sword, like to that sword that he should have subjected: The interior angle that will correspond to him of the swords, be as acute as is possible (given that he should not enter to occupy it with the body) because he has his movement in route, and he can immediately strike with the accidental, or at least it will be almost evident the part of that of reduction that is mixed with it…”
~Pacheco
Most Effective
In the most effective atajo the interior angle is large enough to allow you to step into it and form a conclusion:\
“The interior angle of the swords, is not of more capacity than the width of his body by the depth, so that neither for the inferiority it will be impossible for him to enter in it, nor for the excess of largeness does he quit occupying it, and the movement of conclusion is greater, and for this reason the accidental slower, and the angle that corresponds to the opponent less obtuse: The subjection is made with very intense or reserved strength; so that if the adversary’s sword were missing, making a natural or extraño movement, the extension of the strength does not make the skilled swordsman’s sword lower from that plane where he had placed the atajo, but that he can make a movement of reduction, without another being intermediate for him, or at least the violent being almost imperceptible: And lastly, that the subjected sword, like the subjecting one, does not participate much in the acute angle, with regard to that however much more it is, it will lack the resistant strength in which the agent works, and the arm coming to unite with his body, bringing nearer to the end of the lower rectitude, he will be able to resist less, and the semicircle, that the opponent makes to strike, would be less, and above all it would take from his left hand the reach of the guard that with the compass it would have given him,…”
~Pacheco
With this we have good textual evidence that the point moves first and is directed into the adversary’s weapon to cross it from above which creates the strong angle. In all these examples the point leads the movement into the crossing of the weapons creating an interior angle greater than 0 but equal to or less than 90 degrees, the hand is held fingernails inside (on edge), we obtain equal or better degrees of strength, and we subject with natural power.
Three potential atajos and all must meet the requirements
Is there evidence that a parry which doesn’t meet these requirements of atajo discussed?
Yes; in 18 contradictions and 100 conclusions we see some of this described.
We are told that there is some common action with bad blade positioning on the outside line which gives the adversary capacity to wound you.
Contradiction 7. “Taking one’s sword by the outside, a common technique and commonly used, has its foundation in a fallacy, that is to separate the sword from the good positioning, giving the adversary plenty of occassion and capacity to wound with the same stab that against him one might form, with bad or good art of defense, remaining without defense and defended.”
~Pacheco
Could this action be a parry with the point maintained on target? Maybe and we see this described in 18 Contradictions as well…
Contradiction 18. “The desvios [deflections], either with single sword or accompanied (case that there is text that approves them) not being united with an attack, or in order to choose a means of common proportion, are of notorious danger due to the power that one gives to the adversary with the methods that produce it, by means of the mixed movement, in order to form an attack with liberty of being able to execute it before they end and at the same time, without being concerned with defense, or doing it and remaining defended.”
~Pacheco
And this:
Conclusion 52. “Following the verdadera destreza and its two known and proper effects, the swordsman can defend himself and not injure, injure and defend himself and, breaking his precepts will be able to whichever procure to injure without defending himself, that are proper effects of the common destreza.”
~Pacheco
We also know that the angles between the swords matters.
Conclusion 63. “For the swordsman’s greater perfection and privation of it that the opponent can have in his techniques, it is convenient for him to open and to close the angles that in his sword are made, superior or inferior or equal; and in this way those that are considered between the two bodies, with which he will deprive the effect of the particular potential and virtue of the medio proporcionado.”
~Pacheco
Is Pacheco talking about strong angle and weak angle here as I described above? I think he is and I think the collection of evidence supports that position.
On the other hand do we have evidence of an atajo formed with the point maintained in presence? I’ve looked at Rada’s atajos and the blade shadows cast on the the circle below show the point directed into the opponent’s weapon. When you combine that with the crossing created by lowering the hilt and lifting the tip you create the strong angle. (In atajos 1-4. Atajos 5-8 create the strong angle directing the point into the atajo and then by lowering the tip and lifting the hilt. These knowingly forsake the advantage of natural power.)
Rada’s Atajo 4
I know Rada’s atajos discard some of the Carranza and Pacheco’s requirements but I haven’t seen textual evidence that the strong angle (either from above or below) is no longer correct for Rada.
I readily admit that it may have changed and that would be interesting to find out but I think it would be a mistake to cast Rada’s changes backwards into the older parts of the tradition where the requirements for an atajo seem to be well codified.
The classical dialogue that Jeronimo Sanchez de Carranza created takes place in the summer of 1569 in the house of the duke of Medina-Sidonia. The characters are making jokes, telling stories, and talking about good fencing, bad fencing, and how to teach fencing. What Carranza describes is intimately familiar to anyone who fences and by that I mean a collection of friends gather together to share fellowship and talk about swordplay with food and drinks over a friendly weekend.
450 Years of Tradition
Some of the treasured moments of my life take place in a backyard or at a kitchen table with good friends doing exactly this.
When you consider a person like Carranza you need to understand that he was not a fencing master but rather someone in search of the truth of martial arts and he strongly believed that within this truth was a process that human beings could use to grow, seek knowledge, and make the world a better place through learning and training. Any one of us, regardless of our experience or title, has the potential to be Carrancine when we strive towards the martial truth, when we seek to become better, when we work to improve the world around us.
This year is the 450th anniversary of the summer of 1569 in which La Verdadera Destreza was born. In conjunction with the Chicago Swordplay Guild the Sacramento Sword School has been planning a grand celebration hosted at the Western Martial Arts Workshop in September of 2019. I don’t want to spoil the surprises that the CSG team has in store but I will say that if you are a diestro and you love the martial traditions of Iberia, you are welcome and you will find plenty of opportunities to learn, train, and fence.
What follows is the basis for the Golden Mean in philosophy and how it relates to Destreza. (If you want to find the practical application, you can skip to the end.) First, we should define the Golden Mean and we can start with a simple analogy.
Icarus flies with artificial waxen wings. If he flies too high the wax melts and he plummets into the sea. If he flies too low, the splashing water will weigh down his wings and he will, again, plummet into the sea. Only by flying the middle path will Icarus be safe.
Icarus falling (Merry-Joseph Blondel)
In the same way, Aristotle’s Golden Mean (or the medios) are virtues which exist as mindfully chosen points between two extremes. Aristotle lays this theory out in Nicomachean Ethics as a balance between excess and deficiency. Another key point is that medios are chosen mindfully and with consideration rather than as a habit or a natural response. (As an example, good manners are considered rather than pro forma.)
The medio pattern for the virtues is:
Between two extremes a virtue can be mindfully chosen
Here are some examples:
Medios choose between too much and too little to find a balance
Maybe you agree with this formation of ethics and maybe you don’t but knowing this will help you understand True School Destreza. One of the critical phrases you will see in True School Destreza is “not participating in extremes”. This is an essential clue that we are talking about a medio and the tradition has plenty of them. (When I use a lowercase ‘m’ I’m referring to a general golden medio and not one of the Named Medios which will be uppercase ‘M’.)
Let’s consider some examples of medios in the tradition:
The Right Angle
Between the obtuse angle (GB) and the acute angle (FB), lies the right angle (AB).
Center-weighting
Rather than resting the weight on the left foot (C) or the right foot (A), center the weight (O).
Hand Position
Between the extremes of fingernails up and fingernails down lies fingernails inside.
The Atajo
“Atajo, according to our definition, is when one of the weapons is placed over the other (not in any of its extremes nor with any of its extremes) and with equal or some degree more of strength subjects it and makes it so that the technique that can be formed must be done with more movements and the participation of more angles than those that its simple nature requires.”
~Pacheco’s New Science as translated by Mary Curtis (p.365)
Choosing Medios
Now we know what medios are but as to choosing well, how do we do that?
For that, I think we should consider Carranza and the role of Eudemio in the Carranza text. He is a young man excited about fencing but his mind is filled with many false notions. Through dialogue the other speakers persuade him into a process of action, an algorithm for true Destreza which Carranza outlines.
Consider this passage of Charilao’s in Carranza’s text:
What the aim of the Destreza is:
“Because the Swordsman should first know and after having known to fabricate in the understanding with the declared parts what he should do against the adversary which is the goal in the art of defense, and afterward to look for the means that are best to achieve the intention, because what is first in the intention is the last in the execution of the demonstration, and this is understood in the swordsman who acts with deliberation for some purpose, which is not required in the purely natural agents because the action of these is that of nature: so the demonstration is divided by cause and by effect.”
~Carranza as translated by Mary Curtis (folio 35r)
If there was ever a purer statement of LVD I have yet to find it.
To summarize:
Knowledge – To know you must learn, you must study, understand, gain experience
Perception – Understand the potential, see the possibilities, the paths forward
Decision – From these possible futures choose the best
Action – Bring the decision into reality through action
Carranza directly tells us that his book is intended to improve the young men of Spain. Swordplay is the mechanism he uses to present a method of thoughtful or deliberate action but we shouldn’t be deceived into thinking that he’s only talking about swordplay or even self defense but a path to a beautiful medio or virtue in the Aristotelian sense.
Later, our young protagonist, Eudemio, denounces the false fencing master of the text. At this point in the text he knows the truth because he has learned. He understands the potential paths forward. He makes a decision to tell his friends about the dangers of the false fencing master and he acts.
That’s Destreza. True Destreza, in my opinion, is most correctly the application of this process regardless of the specific system. The books provide us with a traditional system of swordplay that we can try to recreate but behind it all is the pursuit of the truth and the betterment of the world by mindful action.
To paraphrase Carranza each fencer is a musical instrument unique to itself. On each you must tighten some strings and loosen others until the instrument is tuned. Only then will it produce harmony. Fencers have different bodies, different weapons, different spirits, and different contexts. If the causes that form the fight change, the fencing must change as well. That’s expected.
Defensive Medio
More than just a mark on the floor showing distance or measuring swords against each other, the Medio of Proportion (MdP) is a wholistic context in which the diestro gathers up many different causes, processes them using the system above, and then finds the correct place from which he or she can begin to form an offense yet still effectively defend. Balance extremes of offense and defense to find a defensible place to begin forming offense.
Practically Speaking: The simplest advice given here is to set your distance by measuring the swords against each other. The better advice is to set your distance such that you can still effectively defend yourself. If you are bouting and you are routinely struck before you can defend, you are setting up too close. Adjust your distance back until you are able to defend. As you gain experience and skill, you may find that your defensive medio changes.
Offending Medio
The Proportionate Medio (MPado) does the same but guides us in forming the attack such that we are protected. Balance extremes of offense and defense to find a place to strike while defended.
Practically Speaking: A well-formed attack should control either steel or time. If you have the adversary’s threat locked down with a bind, a conclusion, or some other physically detaining action then your attack is safe and achieves beauty. If you control the tempo because your adversary is moving dispositively you may strike in that during tempo of the movement. That’s also beauty. If you manage to provoke a defensive movement from the adversary with the right angle and you strike them with the Apropiado consideration that’s personal artistry and great fencing.
In Conclusion
When we fence and train within our context according to the causes then we may choose our medios well. That virtue is artistry and it creates beauty. When our instrument is in harmony with itself we can create music.
The True School of Destreza is not here to provide simple answers, instead it asks you to think about the context and find the answer yourself. By requiring the diestro to process the causes and choose medios, the diestro becomes an intellectual collaborator in the tradition. Suddenly the responsibility isn’t on the tradition to produce results but on the diestro to use science and skill to find them, to adapt knowledge, to challenge bad ideas, and always to strive towards something greater. Find the medio and you’ve found the truth, even if it is only for a moment.
(Credit to Charles Blair for providing me feedback which helped me correct some of my earlier work and arrive at this better understanding.)
Filed as Geek Stuff, General with Comments Off on Are you Ready Player 2?
(Originally written May 19, 2015)
If you were a child of the console generations which began in the mid-1980s you emerged into a new world; you were raised as a gamer. You are part of a shared experience and perhaps bonded with your brothers and sisters as you took turns jumping, shooting, and running across the digital landscape. These memories are part of a cultural gestalt which defines us just as sports, music, film, and books create a shared consciousness.
My twins were born into a two player co-op experience. Since the beginning they have walked side by side in life and into the digital wilderness experiencing joys, beauty, and frustrations together. They laugh and scream and jump without ever being in doubt that there will always be someone at the other controller to share this life.
In contrast our toddler, Emerson, is a singleton and was born alone. From the sidelines he watched his brothers revel in their play without being able to join. It was clear that he wanted a chance to walk into the frontier he saw before him but how? It was a puzzle that needed an answer.
One evening he made his move as the twins were pulled away from a still warm console for a break. Emerson dashed to the controllers, grabbed one and then looked around. When I walked over he turned up to me and unexpectedly placed a controller in my hand with a look that was clear in meaning. Are you ready player 2? Then he grabbed his own controller and struggled to see what effect he could produce on the screen before him.
In that moment crystallized in a singularly perfect gaze of toddler hope was every father and son since the beginning of time. Will you be with me? Can we do this together? Daddy, will you be my player 2? It was a question filled with hope, trust, love, and uncertainty.
