[Paladin]

The HACA is not some renaissance fair group, these people are seriously interested in restoring western martial arts, swordsmanship and other skills related to medievel European warfare.

I have his book on medieval combat, and the information contained in it is invaluable, and I also learned a great deal of interesting facts. Notably the fact that you use the flat side of a blade to parry and not the edge, and that the sword was never the dominant weapon on the battlefield.

But one point which I would want to argue with Clements is the fact that it wasn't so easy to chop off limbs and sever heads with a blade, especially in the heat of battle. While there were several references to this in various Nordic and Icelandic sagas, they weren't as common as he would make them out to be and your average swordfight would not have resulted in that kind of butchery.

In fact, historically speaking, swift deaths in duels were rare, and most deaths were from wounds. Also, on average in a battle, some 15% of troops being killed would be considered a dangerous amount of fighting!

But we're not talking about that, we're supposed to be talking about Star Wars, so I guess I should just shut up!

[njamilla]

The HACA is not some renaissance fair group, these people are seriously interested in restoring western martial arts, swordsmanship and other skills related to medievel European warfare.

But we're not talking about that, we're supposed to be talking about Star Wars, so I guess I should just shut up!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm quite aware that the HACA isn't a renaissance fair group. In fact, I was more or less taking Clement's side in commenting about ren groups which do re-inactment, not combat. I completely agree with the HACA's approach toward reconstructing Western swordsmanship.

Your comment about using the flat side to parry is very enlightening. This fact is accepted without question in Japanese swordsmanship. That Clements has to make the case that Western swordsmen used the flat as well reveals how much the general public has been influenced by theatrical fighting from the movies.

It's too bad Ray Park didn't have more of a role after EP 1. I think his contribution of Chinese influences would have added nicely to the choreography.

To get back to the topic: If these two people were alive today, there wouldn't be this Maul vs. Tyranus debate. It would be neatly glossed over within their circles our of respect for their positions within the "organization." Even if there were animosities between the two, a liege lord like the Emperor, would not countenance the self-destruction of such valuable disciples.

"Yeah, yeah. But the Emperor's a Sith lord and only two can survive," someone might counter. Few people outside of established fencing instructors understand how much effort goes into training a swordsman. Unless your army is made up of a complete citizen army, you don't squander your assets. Besides, I find it impossible to believe that a two-person Sith system could ever sustain the sword fighting competency. Real fighting must be re-invigorated with new blood. In this sense, the conversion of Dooku is a major coup for Palpatine. He comes with a long history of knowledge and training.

The original idea of the Sith was that of an opposing order of knights to the Jedi. This still makes sense.

[EwokHunter]

Of, course Dooku.
Maul is cool with a double-saber, but with one he is lame.
Dooku could resist Obi-Wan and Anakin together and Anakin with two saber as same as Assaj Ventress and General Grievous...
He freakin' rocks!!!

[Paladin]

Deleted

This post has been edited by Paladin: 30 June 2005 - 01:41 PM