Any resource about gitano's knife fighting will be appreciated.

Thx

Well.. Back to the main subject, I never said there was "fair duels". The point is to have a good technique. When you life is in the game you are not expected to be "fair", I think.

According to my teacher it retraces the Vlad's personal guards technique. We should learn to fight with anything that cut, but mainly knifes. The use of two knifes is usual, but there are techniques to use knife or small sword combined with an one hand axe. Its something from Romania.

The fact is that I don't have any proof of what is real and what is not. I am a newbie in martial arts, but one of his pupils is an experienced guy that trainned different martial arts and has real war experience. Since this guy agree that his knife fighting technique is really good and effective, I beleave I am learning something good. I would just like to know more about its past.

I think I will look for more information about Vlad and its army too.

Having made something of a study of the Spanish "navaja" and the South American "facon", I am extremely skeptical of there being any systematized martial art tradition associated with these weapons, especially within the gypsy community, and tend to agree with the points made by Smilodon.

Generally, knifes are fought with in single time (no parry/riposte) and as such the techniques possible are fairly simple, surprise, agility, aggression and tricks carrying the day. Also, we should remember that the poor and disadvantaged peoples who by default relied on knives did not have the institutions with which to accumulate, refine and pass on fighting techniques, in the manner of the great fencing schools. This is not to say that there was no tuition, because most certainly there was, but it took the form of a family member or friend who fought a few encounters passing on his experience, limited as it may have been, onto his protegee, much as was the case with early rapier play.

Cheers
Chris

Here's the class description:

http://artofcombat.org/public/thespis/Convention/spanishknifemaster.htm

and the main convention page:

http://artofcombat.org/public/thespis/convention/aocflyer.htm

The weapons on display in my office have been the source of some interest, usually in the form of value questions. One young man (who'd lost an ear in a knife fight) showed me his personal knife.

It was a navaja. About 18" long when open. Very nice with ivory and jet scales.

Perhaps I should have my assertion re there being no native systems of using Spanish and South American knives a little clearer. What I meant was that I yet have to be convinced that there existed anything established and widely adopted by way of techniques that were sufficiently complex to require recording, classification and tution, say in the manner of small sword fencing.

True, there were always fencing masters who attempted to raise the use of the common knife to some sort of quasi scientific level, more often than not by borrowing heavily from sword fencing theory; But, by necessity their students would have been restricted to the wealthier town dwellers rather than the disempowered masses, especially gypsies. In any event, the efficacy of these systems is a matter of conjecture, but an Argentinian expert on the matter expressed the opinion that such systems were pretentious since knife fights, with all the skill in the world, are very uncertain affairs and more closely resemble medieval sword brawls than scientific fencing; This is on account of the lack of techniques that can assure victory to the better tutored combatant. I should add that this gentleman's views reflected those of the Elizabethan sword master, Geroge Silver, who on similar grounds objected to the Italian rapier.

One hundred years ago, the English sword historian Egerton Castle
wrote:

"...the navaja - the long Spanish knife - which when practiced with the capa, was based on the principles of ancient sword-and-cloak play, and when alone, on those of the single rapier according to Caranza's teaching. In the first instance, the left arm protected by two turns of the cloak, was used for parrying, the left foot when on guard being kept forward - the dagger was held in the right hand, thumb flat on the blade. In the second case , as there could be but little parrying except by seizing the wrist, true dexterity consisted in tempting the adversary into making some movement which might afford an opportunity for a time hit. On every occasion the stab was delivered by a pass."

To the above we should add, that whatever its merits, the method described by Castle rather than being exclusive to Spain, can be found in many countries as it has a certain inevitability to it. This is because there is not all that much else that can be done technically with a knife. The net result is that the combatants rely to a very high degree on agility, aggression, tricks and experience. A cursory read of the Manual del Baratero will confirm this - It is high on rhetoric, very short on techniques and devotes a lot of space to tricks and tactics; Much in the manner of early sword play up to the time of Marozzo.

This type of fence need not be learned through formal schooling and hence its popularity with the masses. In fact, once the very simple basics are learned, the rest is largely up to individual ability and tactics.

However, what was peculiar to old Spain and its colonies was the popular institution, never condoned by the authorities, of dueling by the lower classes with knife and cape or poncho. It was conducted in the manner described by Catsle, and is still widely practiced in rural Latin America. What is not mentioned by those who write on the subject is that is is a comparatively safe pastime with few casualties - In the usual course of events, the combatants are separated by friends, after a sufficient number of face saving and harmless passes have been made. It is held that this is because it is extremely difficult to score a hit once a cape or heavy jacket is used for parrying, as knives simply do not have the necessary reach, something acknowledged by the author of the MdB. That the opposite perception prevails, ie that such duels are deadly affairs, is due mainly to the literary efforts of the celebrated Argentinian author Jorge Borges and others of that ilk.

Cheers
Chris

[This message has been edited by tom hyle (edited 07-06-2004).]

[This message has been edited by tom hyle (edited 07-06-2004).]

[This message has been edited by tom hyle (edited 07-06-2004).]

You raise some very interesting and valid points. Apropos to which, in old Spain and the Latin Americas, the knife has always been held in some contempt and disdain, fit only for peasants and criminals; This is attested to, in part, by a) the inordinate verbage that the MdB vests in eulogizing the use of the navaja, attempting to raise it to the level of the gentlemanly duel with swords; and
b) the low quality of most historical specimens that pre-date 1900, the time at which this knife became largely obsolete in Spain.

Similarly in the Hyspanic Americas, gentlemen settled their affairs with swords or pistols and common folk with knives. Again, the vast majority of old facons are of very poor quality.

Its is also well to remember that both in the Americas and Spain any number of laws were passed that either restricted or outright prohibited the possession, carrying and fighting with knives. The penal codes of old Spain were remarkably harsh in this respect; This accounts for the very large number of fiersome looking old navajas that lack any type of positive blade locking and are thus of dubious value as a weapon, since lockables attratcted the full wrath of the law.

It was in the late 19th century, when the literary myth makers went to work inventing national personas, that these weapons were elevated in the public's esteem to their present level, very much like how the gunfighter in the wild west became a US cultural icon in the early days of the 20th century.

Cheers
Chris

[This message has been edited by Evans Chris (edited 07-06-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Evans Chris (edited 07-06-2004).]

quote:

---

Evans Chris
Member

To the above we should add, that whatever its merits, the method described by Castle rather than being exclusive to Spain, can be found in many countries as it has a certain inevitability to it. 1 This is because there is not all that much else that can be done technically with a knife. The net result is that the combatants rely to a very high degree on agility, aggression, tricks and experience. A cursory read of the Manual del Baratero will confirm this - It is high on rhetoric, very short on techniques and devotes a lot of space to tricks and tactics; Much in the manner of early sword play up to the time of Marozzo.

This type of fence need not be learned through formal schooling and hence its popularity with the masses. In fact, 2 once the very simple basics are learned, the rest is largely up to individual ability and tactics.

However, what was peculiar to old Spain and its colonies was the popular institution, never condoned by the authorities, of dueling by the lower classes with knife and cape or poncho. It was conducted in the manner described by Catsle, and is still widely practiced in rural Latin America. What is not mentioned by those who write on the subject is that is is a comparatively safe pastime with few casualties - In the usual course of events, the combatants are separated by friends, after a sufficient number of face saving and 3 harmless passes have been made. It is held that this is because it is extremely difficult to score a hit once a cape or heavy jacket is used for parrying, as knives simply do not have the necessary reach, something acknowledged by the author of the MdB.

---

1. Yes. That I can confirm. The basics are the basics and there aren't much you can do about it. There are 8 basic cut directions, a few vital points and the human anatomy don't change that fast.

2. No. That I can tell you that you are completely wrong. For sure talent will prevail when you put two individuals with same skill level to fight. I am also sure that a Ultimating Fight Champion can loose to a newbie if he is in a bad day or maybe he is just too sure about his victory and the newbie, fighting for his life, kill him with a big rock on the head. After all, shit happens. BUT, tequinique advantage, even if its a small difference its always a very BBBIIIGGG advantage and fighting with a knife is not restricted to the use of the knife. When you learn boxing, to punch is not the only thing you learn.

3. Man... I was interesteed in the MdB, but if it says "knives simply do not have the necessary reach", I will just forget about it. It looks like people are blind about what you can do with a knife. If you know how to cut, you can easily cut off an arm without moving too much. If your opponent is using a leather jacket you may not cut it off, but you can always make his arm unusable by cuting the right ligaments and finish him later. THERE IS NO JACKET AND ALMOST NO USEFUL WEARING ARMORY THAT CAN STOP A GOOD KNIFE PUNCTURE, however, a pucture will open your guard.

The point is: yes, you can kill and you can kill safely with a knife and you can walk with it and you can be stoped by the police without worry about it and you don't need to register a knife and a knife is easy to find in any restaurant when you don't have your own and the knife when used by someone that knows how to use is a big advantage over someone that is not using a gun or a sword.

Since I don't think you will find people walking with swords on the street, your only match is the pistol.

Another thing. It doesn't matter if you are strong, big, small, weak. Of course, those add-ons can give you a little more advantage, but even a girl with a good technique can cut the arm of a big guy with KGs of muscle if she can avoid his first move.

quote:

---

Evans Chris
Member

Its is also well to remember that both in the Americas and Spain any number of laws were passed that either restricted or outright prohibited the possession, carrying and fighting with knives. The penal codes of old Spain were remarkably harsh in this respect; This accounts for the very large number of fiersome looking old navajas that lack any type of positive blade locking and are thus of dubious value as a weapon, since lockables attratcted the full wrath of the law.

---

I don't know about Spain's laws, but here in Brazil you don't need to register a knife. If you don't need to register it, you don't need authorization to have it. If you can buy it on the supermarket and go home with it, you can walk with it. Who knows where you are going with a knife? Maybe you are just going to help your mother to cut some meat for your birthday party.

I talked to my teacher (should I say Master?)
I talked with my teacher and he said his family is tsigani, not gypsi. He tried to explain me that you will never see a Tzigan studing how to play the guitar like we do. You will never see a Tzigan having a music class or a military trainning, but they can play the guitar, right? On the road, you may see a Tzigan playing with a small wood piece and you have no idea of what he is doing, but he is practising violin. Probably you will not find a printed book with their sings, but they still sing the same songs of lots of years ago. The same goes with fighting.

He also said that if I want related documents all I can search about are crimes committed by gypsies on agricultural areas. Things like 2 gypsies killing 16 people on a bar with knifes or 1 gypsie killing 5 with a knife, etc.

Nechesh:

Re duelling: The reasons behind dueling by the gentry were numerous. One was that they considered it unseemly to seek redress in the courts, since if they did, their affairs, often unsavory, would have been exposed to all and sundry, thus bringing ridicule on them and also on the ruling class as a whole. Also, dueling was institutionalized within most of the European armies, with the notable exception of the Brits. An officer who failed to seek redress on the field of honour was considered unfit for further service. A good book on the subject is Carl Thimm's Complete Biography of Fencing & Duelling.

My remarks about gypsies were made entirely in the context of the navaja and Hispanic knife fighting and in no way were they meant to be disparaging - A study of Spanish knife fighting inevitably brings one into contact with their culture; To better understand my remarks, it has to be remembered the huge role that gypsies play in Spanish and European folklore, that they were and are mostly fringe dwellers and because of their marginalization, all kinds of things
have been imputed to them, some good and some bad, including supernatural abilities and hidden traditions of great technical complexity and sophistication. Having had some familiarity with them, I am inclined to agree with Smilodon that any talk of a historical gypsy fencing style is nonsense.

Luiz:

First of all, I should declare up front that I am a collector and not a martial artist. However, being a collector also makes me something of a historian and as such I make it my task to study the manner in which weapons in my collection were used. Having traveled extensively in Hispanic countries, including Spain, and having a good command of Spanish, I could investigate the subject to a greater extent than those restricted to English. So, if some of my views appear iconoclastic, this is because they are based on much untranslated material.

Re your points:

2. Some types of fighting are inherently technical (eg small-sword), others less so (eg tomahawks). In the realm of cut&thrust weapons, if a clear victory cannot be obtained through mere technical proficiency, then the fight's outcome depends on other factors. Such was the case with the heavy rapier, with which the techniques possible were comparatively few and to win one had to have an extraordinary feeling for timing, distance and tactics, otherwise mutual wounding or slaying was all too often the outcome - Do read George Silver on this. You can also read an essay of mine on the rapier, published some time ago, here: http://swordforum.com/articles/ams/char-rapier.php

Knifes share all the limitations of the heavy rapier, plus these:

a) Lack of reach;
b) inability to cover or offer opposition when executing time hits (the significance of this cannot be stressed sufficiently); and
c) lack of protection for the hand.

So, all in all, the technical potential of the knife is far less than that of the heavy rapier, and that wasn't much to begin with. Castle supports this by stating that with a navaja a greater liking for fighting is required (than with a sword), implying that victory required morethan mere technical accomplishment.

3. Re the MdB: It is definitely worth a read, if for no other reason than to see just how overstated the whole matter is. What its author was advocating is an unusual style of fighting, that of swapping the knife from hand to hand because, besides other advantages, if the opponent is using the traditional parrying cape it is too difficult to get past it (if wielding the knife with one hand only). We should remember that this was not a problem with a sword, because of the greater reach and ability to cover time hits.

Other things:

The halcyon days of knife dueling, both in Spain and in the Americas was before the 20th century. If you have a look at the then extant penal codes, you will see that knife fighting, whilst by no means eliminated, was severely disapproved of and punished; For one, the 19th century Argentinian dictator Rosas was extraordinarily hard on those of his gauchos who engaged in knife fighting. You are quite right in that currently there is little control over knives in most of South America and that knife fighting still take place (I witnessed one in Buenos Aires), though in Spain the carrying of a knife over 11cm blade length has been illegal since 1900 and traditional dueling largely abandoned by the same date.

If you can read Spanish, there is quite a lot of material on this subject on the web - Just search for "Esgrima Criolla" or "Duelo Criollo", "navajas", "facons" etc.

Your remarks about gypsy ways of learning things is spot on, and your teacher certainly has not mislead you there. Smilodon and I are only objecting to the notion that there is some sort of esoteric tradition of gypsy fencing, implying codified and complex techniques going back in time, as opposed to a mere willingness to fight with knives and adroitness with same. We must also bear in mind that times have changed and just as many gypsies are studying in music conservatories all sorts of otherwise foreign fighting arts, some Asian, have found their way into their culture; Not only that, but many gypsies are elevating their once rustic arts to unprecedented development through institutionalization, as is the case with staged Flamenco dancing, guitar and violin music.

Anyway, this thread is breaking up into too many divergent directions and perhaps we should continue by private e-mails; I am happy to oblige. On this forum we should stick to the weapons themselves.

Cheers
Chris

quote:

---

Originally posted by tom hyle:
[...Under this custom, one sometimes sees sizeable swords that have been carefully constructed to remain a "knife" (machete, langenmesser, giant navaja....). [This message has been edited by tom hyle (edited 07-06-2004).][/B]

---

Hi Tom:

Re Giant Navajas: Not disputing the point you are making, merely adding a footnote:

These present a trap for the unwary. The size range of historical navajas that were put to use, be it as a tool or weapon, according to the Spanish authority R.M.D.P y Fortron, were in the range of 18-24cm blade length. The much bigger ones were invariably show pieces used by the cutlers as capability statements - One can still see these in Spanish and Italian shops. My guess is that a few would have been carried on festive occasions as symbolic dress items (in the manner of parade swords), but not as weapons. There is a technical reason for this: The navaja's weak point is at the pivot pin and a blade much longer than 25cm makes for a very easily broken knife. Some have made much of the fact that an open navaja can exceed 40 or even 50cm and thus approximate the dimensions of a sword; Whilst true, this is highly misleading. We must remember that a navaja is not held by the very end of the handle, so its effective reach is not significantly greater than that of an equivalent fixed blade knife and thus no match for a sword in terms of reach, even a short sword. If anything, the long handle must have been an encumbrance. In this regard, do ignore the illustrations of Gustav Dore, as these were fanciful in the extreme.

[This message has been edited by tom hyle (edited 07-07-2004).]

I obviously misunderstood your post. I entirely agree with your sentiments re dueling. In a good many instances it did not amount to more than legitimized murder.

Great photos - The ones I met in my travels were a little better dressed, but then we live in modern times.

That Double Bichwa looks mighty interesting. Thanks.

Cheers
Chris

quote:

---

The idea seems to be on the board that one cannot attack and parry with the knife at the same time. This is untrue from a strict construction, as it is quite as possible with a knife to make cuts that are attack and defense in one as with a daito.
[/B]

---

1. If I understand you correctly, what you appear to be describing is known in sword play as an attack in single time that is covered. With swords this is done by usually attacking into an attack and along the way interposing one's own blade so that the opponent's incoming sword cannot get to you. I cannot see how this is possible with knives, unless wearing some sort of armour on the arm that wields the knife and a gauntlet to protect the hand.

It is a well established fact that knives, when used alone, can only be fenced in single time. For those unfamiliar with fencing terminology, this means that knives can only attack, but not defend. In single time fencing, be it with sword or knife, voiding (moving the body away from the attack) is the principal form of defence. The opposite is fencing in double time; Here one's sword blade parries the attack (1st time) and then counter-attacks (2nd time). Fencing in double time is considered far safer than in single but can only be done with the light swords that appeared after the 18th century. DT sword play makes for predictability and can be extremely technical
whereas ST fencing is simple, yet hazardous as one requires a very keen feeling for timing otherwise mutual slaying, or at least wounding is the likely outcome.

I hope that this explanation makes Castle's account of Spanish navaja fighting a little clearer.

2. Re Oversized Navajas: With modern know-how I think that it is possible to make a really large navaja that will not break, but it would be very heavy and thus slow. But then, if one want's a long blade why make it a folder?

The only reason that the Spaniards settled on navajas, is because everything else was banned - Actually even lockable bladed navajas were illegal, though at times in some parts of Spain, mostly in the South, they were tolerated, but only up to a point. The majority of antiques offered for sale do not have a positive blade lock and this tells us something about the law.

Actually, navajas made for a poor fighting weapon, and this is why in Hispanic America and Nort Africa they were not used, the locals much preferring a fixed bladed, often double edged, one that could be drawn far more quickly and was not likely to break.

It is interesting to note that the gauchos of old in South America didn't think much of any knife with a blade less than 30cm for fighting.

Cheers
Chris

"If I understand you correctly, what you appear to be describing is known in sword play as an attack in single time that is covered. With swords this is done by usually attacking into an attack and along the way interposing one's own blade so that the opponent's incoming sword cannot get to you. I cannot see how this is possible with knives, unless wearing some sort of armour on the arm that wields the knife and a gauntlet to protect the hand."

If you do it right your hand doesn't enter into it.
WHat you call double time is fairly commonly taught with daggers. You can take classes on attack and parry type fighting with bowies in N America, with many influences from smallsword fighting. This is not the basis of a weapon being effective or complexly studyable or anything, and is often (big surprise) considered a rather simplistic and primitive way to restrict your fighting ability, by those who practise other methods (such as sheild fighting or simultaneous attack and defense). It is actually a system trying to play catch-up for a lack of a shield. With shield (basically the left hand, with or without wrapping or object; you can usually pick up something, if there's time. A sturdystick works real well.) you can make seperate attacks and parries at the same time, of course.
Keep in mind I'm not saying a small pocket knife is an ideal weapon by any means; it is far inferior to a dagger, but it's better than nothing, and when due to poverty or oppression it's all you have, sophisticated combat techniques and theories are, of course, applicable to, and improvements to its use. The idea that there can be a weapon where this is not the case does not make sense. Whether people are well armed has nothing to do with whether they have well-developed martial arts traditions, anyway. The famous weaponless combat techniques of East Asia have been widely practiced by disarmed poor people.

quote:

---

On a lighter note, my cousin is married to a 1/2 gypsy, 1/2 Dane, and well......she's really hot.

---

Though not finished yet, this may be a good time to share with you some webpages I've been working on, relating to weapons and costume. I give you:

Cabaret Bellydance

Tribal Bellydance

They're part of my Fashion Clinic project which grew out of my Ritual Weapons page.

Kepp them comin' baby, kepp them comin'

Keep them comin' baby, keep them comin'