Cossack sword arts (Shashka/Adyghe)

[Master Nero Attoru]

Also, you may be interested to check out something like this.  I'm no historian, so I couldn't verify the claim about it being the "oldest martial art", but it was something that intrigued me ever since I saw it in person last year in India.  The sword work is not unlike that seen in the Chinese dao, which is essentially another saber much like the shashka.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI84oM_bJeg

[Darth Cephalus]

That last video was very cool. Thanks for that. Some of the stuff around the 1 min mark and the 5 min mark was pretty familiar looking as well.

As to the plum flower and the performance/dance videos, my way of thinking about it goes to that video on the hidden strikes. If someone were standing in front of that guy, they could easily have taken him down with a thrust. However, that is thinking of things from a dueling mindset, and in SW cannon as in history, dueling is much more rare than open combat. I am only just getting into the Shashka stuff and may be off base, but I can only imagine that these people were more concerned with a battlefield or brawl than with an organized sport encounter. Take for instance that first draw and slice maneuver.

I like to think of that repeating... I call it a wing spin... from the dance videos as a holding pattern. I use it in performance, because it is a low exertion move that has a lot of range and is easy to move with. It stays off your feet and is easy to isolate. If you do it in a pattern and it gets to be second nature, you can strike with it from any point in the rotation. The strike comes from whatever place the sword was and comes with a force built on the momentum of the blade. It is easier for people to try this and see for themselves than it is for me to understand it fully. Try the full 5 beat spin on repeat. The obi-ani to the over the shoulder. Get it down and then try just slicing either forward or to the side at random times. The strike is easy, forceful, and easily falls into a second or third strike or back into the pattern.

Basically it is like a ready position but the blade is moving which means that the potential for attack is different at different points. As the dancers show, it is also possible to change the direction of the body entirely while not breaking pattern. Again, for dueling, this is just a movement vocabulary as far as I can see. In a more active setting where a combatant would have to close and complete quickly as they may be getting attacked from any quarter by someone else, I feel it would add advantage. Not only do you have a fluidity of direction for defense, but you have deterrence, and quite possibly the possibility of an accidental attack or parry. As an attacker, it could provide cover during closing.

To be clear, most of this is postulation. I like it for the movement vocabulary I mention. I just can't think that if these parts, no matter how degenerate, come from an established combat practice, there must be more to them than wasted moves.

Thanks also for the Kult of Athena link. I bought a rapier from them once upon a time. I had forgotten about them since. I will see what they have.

[Master Althalus]

The thing with the Shashka as with the Polish sabre and some other (mostly cavalry) swords is, that it is crictical to keep it in motion. Every weapon with the PoB that far out has the problem of overcoming inertia. When in motion, intertia can be put to use - as long as the motion is not stopped (by a hit or parry), it is rather easy to keep up the movement. But from a stand-still, it takes a lot of force to initiate movement.
The next problem is, that inertia makes it hard to change directions of movement. The most efficient way is to use circular moves instead of sharp changes of directions.

Taking all these things into account, it is only natural that the method looks like it does. Imagine this on horseback: the movement of the horse makes it easier to start the motion of the blade. Keeping it in motion adds the power of the horse to every swing, making it cut through foot-soldiers with ease.
The only thing they would need to do is, turning the blade into different directions, without breaking the flow too much. And that's where those exercises come from.

[Darth Cephalus]

Yea, just about that was my understanding as well. That said, there is a lot more similarity in the weapon I suspect. I will let you know when I get a shashka, but I can say that if you have an initiate with a HG blade in it, inertia is definitely something to consider. The POB gets to be just shy of half way down the blade.

[Master Althalus]

The POB gets to be just shy of half way down the blade.

Depends a lot on the hilt used. I have some, where the PoB is somewhere about 5 - 10 cm from the hilt and that's about the PoB of a sidesword. Most cavalry sabres tend to go into the 15 - 20 cm direction, some even more (I have quite a collection of originals and replicas alike here ...).

[Master Nero Attoru]

Yea, just about that was my understanding as well. That said, there is a lot more similarity in the weapon I suspect. I will let you know when I get a shashka, but I can say that if you have an initiate with a HG blade in it, inertia is definitely something to consider. The POB gets to be just shy of half way down the blade.

I wouldn't say it's quite that extreme, but I definitely get your point.  I have some extremely lightweight hilts (including ones I make from PVC) which create an interesting dynamic when paired with heavier blades.  In general, I get the sense that the average person tends to be surprised at how blade-heavy most real swords can be, even those with a POB closer to the hilt.  We don't tend to think of the sword as a tool, but that's essentially what it is - a tool for killing.  As such, it's designed to make the task as easy as possible for the user.  The correct usage of the weapon entails letting it do the work, with the swordsman simply providing intent and direction.

That aspect of swordsmanship, combined with the battlefield methodology you mentioned, is what I try to emphasize with Shii-Cho.  The idea of a basic Form like Shii-Cho is that anyone could pick up a weapon and use it effectively, and as such the techniques utilize the weapon's momentum (hence the large amplitude cuts that most people associate with it).

Also, another weapon along the same lines as the shashka that I find interesting is the bagua dao, shown in this episode of Sword Lab.  Just some more educational material to consider.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Znwni04WQL0" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">www.youtube.com/watch?v=Znwni04WQL0</a>

[Darth Nonymous]

Now to the comment about cutting the fat. No. Just no. I have long held that a conversation about hitting things must not always be just about hitting things. This point is part of the basis for my philosophy. My take away from the videos and purpose in showing them was that the moves in the dance videos were a variation of the same moves in the combat videos. That is to say that the skill sets are transferable to some extent. As a relation to combat or the struggle between individuals, familiarity with the motion of a blade around the body is strictly speaking a combat skill. The hidden strike video was a video demonstrating the ways that the moves in the dance videos will move the blades between positions from which an attack or strike may be made. Just because there are no strikes does not mean that the technique has no efficacy so long as the potential for strikes exists and is enhanced through the technique.

I think you misunderstand the intent. We are past the question of does this stuff benefit sabering, it is now a matter of HOW does it benefit sabering? TPLA has always held that performance based martial arts can give very high levels of coordination, strength, agility, and athleticism and are therefore, not irrelevant to fighting. BUT fighting is fighting, training is training, and dancing is dancing. While it is an interesting anthropological and historical curiosity that they preserved their sword culture to some extent in dance ( a common thing as it turns out), it is not evidence that these dances constitute some sort of training regimen.

That was my purpose in my translation of the techniques in my video. I was interested in the new ranges of motion opened up in the videos and the ways to have a blade moving in such a way that it does not hinder or limit the movement of another blade. That concept is central to two weapon fighting. If your blades get in each others way you have a real problem. The dance, as I see it in the technique, was a practice routine used by very combat oriented individuals to create a fluidity that would be functionally useful. I like to think that my ability to do these things gives me access to a language of movement that has all kinds of application, among which would be my ability to move my blade into an opponent.

The skills and benefit you get from the practice of the saber dance is more global and general than specific for swordplay. You would get similar benefit from learning contact juggling or close embrace tango. The argument that we are making is simple, while Spinning and orbits are basic skills and exercises, and train generalized skills, they are NOT fundamental to the practice. Just as drill team acrobatics obviously show a high degree of skill and precision, both qualities that are essential to shooting and marksmanship. However, these exercises do NOT train one to actually fire the weapon and hit the target.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLi9SayY4AY

That language of movement is a conversation beyond "what is the best way to hit someone". Yet still it is a combat conversation. There is value to the question "what isa different way to hit someone" just as there is value to the question "what is a good way to avoid being hit". In a chess game, there is a lot to be said for the unusual move. If the focus is always on pure efficacy and trimming the fat, you lose not just the art and beauty of the game, but you sacrifice results. That is why I shared this here, not just to lend validity to something that I am tired of being relegated to a second class status, but rather to offer variety into a discussion that tends to get too bogged down in result based thinking. Not every chess move will place the opposing king in check. Some will place your own in danger. A player who wants to be a better player should maybe try learning to do the latter as a way to improve their ability to do the former.

Yes fine, discussions about conditioning, skill training, games, fitness and other things definitely come into play in discussion of combat. No one is arguing with that point. And no one is making the point that spinning or what not is completely useless for combat training. But something that strikes me when looking at the videos you posted, there doesn’t seem to be anything novel. The biomechanics are pretty much the standard ones given when talking about this stuff. As I sad before, the dancing looks similarly useful to other types of dance with an object as far as benefit goes. The cut video is well done, truth be told, he is a good cutter. But, the cuts he actually throws are just standard frontal plane cuts. There are some introductory flourishes and the jump spin in there, but the actual cut is chambered and thrown as any common cut is thrown. I guess I am wondering how is it not just doing a bunch of stuff before executing a simple and conventional technique?

That said, there is also a benefit to having a basis of comparison and expanding vocabulary. If one looks at immediate results, I doubt anything will ever approach a simple thrust. But what happens if, accepting this, you just learn how to thrust? The moves of these people may look goofy and they may get you hit. I could say the same for that Kendo stance where you lead with your face. That does not mean that it is of no use. This kind of spinning is about blade angle and position. It is about transitions and mobility. If a slash fails, it is about getting to another in a more fluid way than parry and repost. In that way, it is more about the next move than the current. The creation of a barrage as you saw in the choreographed piece. At least that is how I see it.

As I said, no argument here, we have discussed it several times in the past and continue to do so. I’m not sure why you think we think we do not accept this practice as training. But, as I said, we are past the question of is it applicable and on to the “how is it applicable” phase. The “fat” we are looking for is the HOW not the IF.

Here are our videos on the topic if anyone is interested:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwzB9ayhLV0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq6QOUx4x_E

[Darth Cephalus]

fighting is fighting, training is training, and dancing is dancing.

But with this tradition, it seems to me that the line is not so clearly drawn. Dancing is training, training is dancing, fighting is training, etc. Unlike a tango having a set of movements that merely condition the body, these dances are composed of the combat techniques themselves. I don't think you can easily draw the line and separate the discussion.

There are some introductory flourishes and the jump spin in there, but the actual cut is chambered and thrown as any common cut is thrown. I guess I am wondering how is it not just doing a bunch of stuff before executing a simple and conventional technique?

Fair question but mostly momentum I think. I doubt he could have made a couple of those cuts without the flourish. If you try it with an empty hand, you can displace more air if you duplicate the movement of a flourish before you move your hand than you can if you just move your hand. So basically, it seems to me that you hit harder, and if the blade is already moving in the pattern, more quickly. If that does not make sense, I will have to film you a video.

As I said, no argument here, we have discussed it several times in the past and continue to do so. I’m not sure why you think we think we do not accept this practice as training.

I think if you look at my track record with posting about stuff like this in this sub board over the last few years, this one should answer itself.

[Taegin Roan]

I know very little about actual sword fighting, but this thread has been very interesting to read. I love learning about this stuff, so that makes it even better. Lots of interesting discussion for me to chew on.

[Greywolf]

Dancing is training, training is dancing, fighting is training, etc.

This somehow reminds me of Capoeira:
https://theculturetrip.com/south-america/brazil/articles/disguised-in-dance-the-secret-history-of-capoeira/
"Hidden in the musical and rhythmical elements of the form, violent kicks were disguised as passionate dance movements..."

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXJkdCD_VDc" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXJkdCD_VDc</a>

[Darth Nonymous]

But with this tradition, it seems to me that the line is not so clearly drawn. Dancing is training, training is dancing, fighting is training, etc. Unlike a tango having a set of movements that merely condition the body, these dances are composed of the combat techniques themselves. I don't think you can easily draw the line and separate the discussion.

I don't know what you are reacting to when you say that. To me, the saber dance of the cossacks and the actual saber fighting of the region appear totally distinct in performance and intent. From a historical POV as well, this seems less of a thin line than even Chinese martial art. The example of Capoeira is a far better example of dance, ritual and martial art combining into a new practice or being directly related to conflict.  Here it seems pretty clear. The dance is a demonstration not a training regimen. You can still extract useful information out of it, but you would need some prior knowledge or training in sword fighting to do it very well.

Fair question but mostly momentum I think. I doubt he could have made a couple of those cuts without the flourish. If you try it with an empty hand, you can displace more air if you duplicate the movement of a flourish before you move your hand than you can if you just move your hand. So basically, it seems to me that you hit harder, and if the blade is already moving in the pattern, more quickly. If that does not make sense, I will have to film you a video.

Not from what I am seeing. The spins and flourishes end at the chamber for the cut and stop. I don't see any momentum being transferred. That's y problem with it. The spins and flourishes are not related to the cut at the end. It's just spin, spin, chamber strike. Like doing a bunch of twirls with your pistol before shooting right a target in front of you conventionally. The previous movements don't have any relation to the action being performed.

I think if you look at my track record with posting about stuff like this in this sub board over the last few years, this one should answer itself.

I think you might be overstating your argument.

[Darth Cephalus]

I can understand your stance on the first point as the result of your stance on the second. If you don't see how any momentum is transferred then it is easy to see that the moves are wasted and purely ornamental. I would argue that they are not as it is. I will add a video to my queue to try to show this. That queue is a bit backed up at the moment though. In the meantime, did you try it out? Throw a cut from ready and then one at the end of an eclipse spin or after an over the shoulder. For me, the difference in speed and strength is striking (pun intended).

[Darth Nonymous]

I can understand your stance on the first point as the result of your stance on the second. If you don't see how any momentum is transferred then it is easy to see that the moves are wasted and purely ornamental. I would argue that they are not as it is. I will add a video to my queue to try to show this. That queue is a bit backed up at the moment though. In the meantime, did you try it out? Throw a cut from ready and then one at the end of an eclipse spin or after an over the shoulder. For me, the difference in speed and strength is striking (pun intended).

I can throw cuts from every position and do every time I practice cuts without any of the flourishes.

They are as follows:
1.a standard cut from the unsheathing.
2.A body spin to a cut-again a common cut.
3.Spin behind the back to the front hip then an upward cut across.
4.Spin BTB reverse the direction, and stops it and cuts horizontally.
5.Same cut as 3 without the BTB spin and larger swings before.
6.BTB spin, stop to a chop down, swing up, then chop down again.
7.Spin up to chamber at shoulder, a cut down and across.
8.Spin, stop, chop down, stop, chop up.
9.Essentially the same as #2 but with a jump spin rather than a running spin.
10.Pretty much the same except coming from more over the head.

Also, I would have a better time seeing these things as connected if he continued after the cut or moved through a space quickly cutting multiple targets. Here he doesn’t even alway remain in control of the weapon after the cut. IF some one was spinning performed the cut and kept spinning without stopping would be nice too.

Most uses are not with the intent on adding momentum but rather moving the blade from position to position.  More like what is displayed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yegd3YpjmWY

[Darth Nonymous]

I can understand your stance on the first point as the result of your stance on the second. If you don't see how any momentum is transferred then it is easy to see that the moves are wasted and purely ornamental.

Also stop putting words in my mouth. I never said they were "purely ornamental". That's your dichotomy. Not mine. I believe they should be trained and have always stated that. But I don't think that saber dances and spinning routines are going to teach you jack about using the sword to defend yourself or hurt some one.