My understanding is that literacy rates refer to Latin literacy (not sure if the graphs reflect that, but I think so). By that standard, Europe is mainly illiterate at the present, with a sharp decline in the last few decades. The rate of people that knew how to read in their own language was significantly higher. However, since we are talking about Aristotle, how his ideas were being adopted, and assuming that his works were mainly available in Latin at that time, your point stands.
As a personal comment, Aristotle view on time stayed in place until the early 1900. Newton's view on time was basically the same. Moving the reference point from the earth to the sun helps in understanding the motion of planets and having better predictions, but the view on time as a parametrisation of events is the same. Until special relativity, no paradigm shift had occurred for over two thousand years. Time was just the ordering of events and was convoluted with the idea of motion.
So in fencing, tempo is initiating the right motion at the right time, and I would add, performing it in sync with the opponent (e.g. so a parry doesn't miss the incoming attack by being too early or too late). Due to the latter, you cannot practice tempo by yourself. I think this is the main reason why one should find and fight not just one partner, but as many people as possible.
I don't have enough skill to prove the following, but I think that if someone can speed up or slow down his actions in a controlled fashion, it would make him the most dangerous fencer in the world (cuz on averaged, our monkey brains are good at syncing to certain speed of a motion - and why masters say to test an unknown opponent a bit before an attack - but suck at gauging accelerations and thus the variation of speed; the ones more able to do the latter being better at contact fighting).
I also want to give points for including the animation of sorts of the plays in an article about tempo, and thus movement. Good job!
I appreciate the insightful response, I'll have to look closer at Buringh and Van Zanden's research to see if that is a specific of the data set. I definitely learned something there, and I'll have to get back to you on that one. That's a great observation.
I definitely agree that tempo has to be correct regardless of attacking or defending, it might've served to build that out a little more in the article. When the Italian authors, specifically, talk of mezzo tempo that's often what they're implying. My motion has to fit within the time of your motion, and you're right to point out that too soon can either cause someone to get hit, or to make a parry that lacks enterprise. I think that's why Marozzo and Manciolino address it as interrupting, as it implies meeting an attack rather than positioning to receive an attack. Which provides some helpful context to build off of.
To cover your statement about speeding up and slowing down an action. So in my fencing (primarily rapier) I've seen this a number of times. There is a guy I fence with that will occasionally just reach out and touch me with his blade. It moves so slow that my brain just doesn't recognize it as a threat. It's not moving fast enough.
So basically. Yes. Yes this works. Speed up and slow down. Throw slow probing cuts. Train them. Then from a probing cut throw some form of winding cut. If that fails throw another one at a slow speed which you transfer into a thrust. It will land 90% of the time.
I am just starting with the rapier, but I do want to try to do that myself. Can I ask if you prefer a heavier or a lighter rapier? So a heavier one to help push the opponent's blade out of the way, or a lighter one that would have less inertia and allow you to vary the movement's speed with less effort. Similar question about a blade forward or a close to the guard point of balance.
I personally prefer a super light rapier. But that is because most of my fencing is based around avoiding the bind and just rocketing at them.
Also my point of balance is just in front of my cup. its a little trickier for redirecting the shot. But it makes it a rocketship in that initial thrust.
My understanding is that literacy rates refer to Latin literacy (not sure if the graphs reflect that, but I think so). By that standard, Europe is mainly illiterate at the present, with a sharp decline in the last few decades. The rate of people that knew how to read in their own language was significantly higher. However, since we are talking about Aristotle, how his ideas were being adopted, and assuming that his works were mainly available in Latin at that time, your point stands.
As a personal comment, Aristotle view on time stayed in place until the early 1900. Newton's view on time was basically the same. Moving the reference point from the earth to the sun helps in understanding the motion of planets and having better predictions, but the view on time as a parametrisation of events is the same. Until special relativity, no paradigm shift had occurred for over two thousand years. Time was just the ordering of events and was convoluted with the idea of motion.
So in fencing, tempo is initiating the right motion at the right time, and I would add, performing it in sync with the opponent (e.g. so a parry doesn't miss the incoming attack by being too early or too late). Due to the latter, you cannot practice tempo by yourself. I think this is the main reason why one should find and fight not just one partner, but as many people as possible.
I don't have enough skill to prove the following, but I think that if someone can speed up or slow down his actions in a controlled fashion, it would make him the most dangerous fencer in the world (cuz on averaged, our monkey brains are good at syncing to certain speed of a motion - and why masters say to test an unknown opponent a bit before an attack - but suck at gauging accelerations and thus the variation of speed; the ones more able to do the latter being better at contact fighting).
I also want to give points for including the animation of sorts of the plays in an article about tempo, and thus movement. Good job!
I appreciate the insightful response, I'll have to look closer at Buringh and Van Zanden's research to see if that is a specific of the data set. I definitely learned something there, and I'll have to get back to you on that one. That's a great observation.
I definitely agree that tempo has to be correct regardless of attacking or defending, it might've served to build that out a little more in the article. When the Italian authors, specifically, talk of mezzo tempo that's often what they're implying. My motion has to fit within the time of your motion, and you're right to point out that too soon can either cause someone to get hit, or to make a parry that lacks enterprise. I think that's why Marozzo and Manciolino address it as interrupting, as it implies meeting an attack rather than positioning to receive an attack. Which provides some helpful context to build off of.
Great stuff, great insights! Thank you!
To cover your statement about speeding up and slowing down an action. So in my fencing (primarily rapier) I've seen this a number of times. There is a guy I fence with that will occasionally just reach out and touch me with his blade. It moves so slow that my brain just doesn't recognize it as a threat. It's not moving fast enough.
So basically. Yes. Yes this works. Speed up and slow down. Throw slow probing cuts. Train them. Then from a probing cut throw some form of winding cut. If that fails throw another one at a slow speed which you transfer into a thrust. It will land 90% of the time.
I am just starting with the rapier, but I do want to try to do that myself. Can I ask if you prefer a heavier or a lighter rapier? So a heavier one to help push the opponent's blade out of the way, or a lighter one that would have less inertia and allow you to vary the movement's speed with less effort. Similar question about a blade forward or a close to the guard point of balance.
I personally prefer a super light rapier. But that is because most of my fencing is based around avoiding the bind and just rocketing at them.
Also my point of balance is just in front of my cup. its a little trickier for redirecting the shot. But it makes it a rocketship in that initial thrust.