While I profess no experience whatsoever in martial arts, I have great admiration and respect for those who seriously practice these disciplines. It would seem to me, as an observer, that these forms and manuevers although gracefully practiced in repetition and apparant stylized choreography, are intended to condition the individual into harmony with the weapon. Clearly, as we have previously discussed, in the heat of battle such rehearsed movements would have no place, and the warrior would not be thinking of following such course. It would seem that unconsciously, however, many of the standard movements may be applied as required and the warrior would be conditioned to carry them through.
Conversely, I cannot help recalling an instance in the narrative of a British cavalryman after the Battle of Balaklava, better known of course for the immortal Charge of the Light Brigade. The trooper was completely incensed because in a combat encounter with a Russian cavalry trooper, the proper sword combat procedures were not followed by the Russian! As I recall he complained that he attacked with a cut 3 or 4 (cannot be certain of the numeric) but the Russian responded with an unexpected cut, out of sequence and "the bloody fool knocked me off my horse!!". It almost sounded as if there had been a referee there he would have announced a foul!!
It seems there are many narratives of battles where the complete uselessness of certain rigid military drills totally out of place in unforeseen circumstances became more liability than asset.
I agree that while certain movies and video clips offer great entertainment, they are less than informative when it comes to actual weapon history. One of my recollections is of a pirate movie (of course c.1680) where one of the pirates is wielding a brass hilted cutlass (uh, a M1860 naval cutlass from the Civil War!
.
Best regards,
Jim