Sir Richard Francis Burton - A New System of Sword Exercise for Infantry

NEW SYSTEM OF SWORD EXERCISE

BY
RICHARD F. BURTON,
AUTHOR OF A SYSTEM OF BAYONET EXERCISE (1853).

LONDON:
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY
WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, 13, CHARING CROSS.
1876.

The Twelve Cuts

Before proceeding to develop my New Sword Exercise for Infantry, I would offer a few remarks upon the changes proposed in these pages. Whilst the last half century has witnessed an immense improvement in the projectile weapons of the civilized world, the theory and practice of the sabre or cutting arm have remained in statu quo ante; indeed, if there has been any change it is for the worse. The two systems authorized in the British army are completely behind their time. First and senior is the Infantry Sword Exercise (with plates): Revised Edition, Adjutant-Generals Office, Horse Guards. London: Printed under the superintendence of H.M. Stationery Office: 1874. The second is the Instructions for the Sword, &c. (without plates), for the use of Cavalry. Adjutant-Generals Office, Horse Guards. June, 1871.

The latter can be despatched very briefly. Despite the late date, it is as obsolete as the older system; it is, in fact, only the Infantry Exercise with the addition of pursuing practice, and post practicethe latter upon a sort of modern Quintain not made to revolve. So far, so good. The practised swordsman has little to learn when mounted, except the few modifications which he can teach himself. His real study is on foot. But some of the remarks appear not to have been written by a practical hand. For instance, we read (p. 27): In delivering a forward thrust, very little force is necessary when the horse is in quick motion, as the extension of the arm, with a good direction of the point, will be fully sufficient. Fully sufficientI should think so! The recruit must be carefully and sedulously taught when meeting the enemy, even at a trot or canter, to use no force whatever, otherwise his sword will bury itself to the hilt, and the swordsman will either be dragged from his horse, or will be compelled to drop his weaponif he can. Upon this point I may quote my own System of Bayonet Exercise (p. 27):

The instructor must spare no pains in preventing the soldier from using force, especially with the left or guiding arm, as too much exertion generally causes the thrust to miss. A trifling body-stab with the bayonet (I may add with the sword) is sufficient to disable a man; and many a promising young soldier has lost his life by burying his weapon so deep in the enemys breast that it could not be withdrawn quickly enough to be used against a second assailant. To prevent this happening, the point must be delivered smartly, with but little exertion of force, more like a dart than a thrust, and instantly afterwards the bayonet must be as smartly withdrawn. In fact the thrust should consist of two movements executed as nearly simultaneously as possible; and it requires long habit, as the natural man, especially the Englishman, is apt to push home, and to dwell upon his slouching push.

The Infantry Sword Exercise is nought but a snare and a delusion. Except in pagination, it is the same as the Revised Edition of 1845the only difference or revision that I can detect is the omission of a short sentence in p. 26 of the older issue; it even retains the General Order of Lord Hill, 23rd April, 1842. Thus Revision is confined to the plates. In 1845 the figures wear the milk-pail shako widening at the top, the frock coat and the scales; the last edition, dated April, 1874, dons the tall modern chimney-pot, the tightly buttoned tunic with stiff collar and, like its predecessor, the sash and the scabbard. It is no wonder that the figures display an exceeding gne, the stiffness of pokers, as the phrase is: here we might with profit borrow from the French or Italian artist.

I am opposed to almost every page of this unhappy brochure, especially to the Seven Cuts and Guards of the target; to the shape of the targetI never yet saw a man absolutely circular; to the grip of the sword; to the position in guard; to the Guards or Parades, especially the inside engaging guard (Carte); to the Lunge; to the angle of the feet, and to the system of loose practice.

The Cuts will be noticed in a future page. Of the grip I may remark that the one essential, the position of the thumb, both in attacks and parries is, as a rule, neglected by the Sword Exercise.

The position on guard is a debated point. Many, indeed I may say most, of the moderns follow the rule of all the older swordsmen, namely, reposing two-thirds of the body-weight (as in p. 19 of the Exercise, which, however, is an exaggeration) upon the left leg. The reasons usually given are that in this position the person is not so much exposed; moreover, that the centre of gravity being thrown back adds spring and impetus to the Lunge. We may remember how Cordelois (1862) made a step towards change in his fencing-schools at Paris. My objection to the old style is that the farther you are from your opponent, the longer and slower will be your attack; moreover, I have ever found, in personal practice, that it is easier and more convenient to sit on guard with the weight equally distributed on both haunches and legs. In fact, that the backward position is not natural any pair of thighs can ascertain for itself after trying it for five minutes: whilst the muscles of the right or forward limb are relaxed as much as possible, those of the left are tight strung, so as to do double work and threaten cramp. This single objection is serious enough to counterbalance any other claims to superiority.

Again, there is no excuse for the guards in the Exercise. The Hanging guard (p. 18, in the older issue p. 21) is the worst that can be imagineda painful spectacle, a lesson of what to avoid. The head ignobly cowers, and the eyes look up, in a forced and wearying position, when the former should be held upright, and the glance should be naturally fixed upon the opponents eye and blade-point; the body is bent so as to lose our national advantage of height and strength, and the right fore-arm in such a position is, and ever must be, clean uncovered. Let the recruit, however strong may be his haunches, stand a few minutes in this Hanging guard, and he will soon feel by his fatigue how strange, awkward, and strained it is. The Carte or inside Engaging Guard (pp. 19, 22), again, endangers the fore-arm. The Tierce or outside Engaging Guard (pp. 20, 23) holds the hand too low, and unduly shortens the arm, thus offering an undesirable amount of exposure; it is in fact not a Guard, but a bad parry in low Tierce. Worse still is the Lunge (pp. 14, 17): here the body is placed bolt upright, instead of being easily bent, without exaggeration, to the fore, prolonging, as every man instinctively would do at his first attempt, the line of the left leg. The former position is not only fatiguing and against the grain; also shortens the reach and carefully places the opponent safely out of measure. Many swordsmen still contend for the stiffly upright position in Lunge: I am disposed to consider it a mere survival of the classical and artificial French school of arms, which aimed at opposing nature as sedulously as the Italian, who always leans to the fore, attempted to follow her dictates. Moreover, their arguments are founded upon the abuse, not the use, of the inclined pose which the body naturally assumes. In teaching the recruit it is well to see that he does not fall into the dangerous habit of throwing the chest forward (