scottish broadsword

anonymous asked:

To mod Hell: I'm so sorry but I have to ask why do you know so much about and have so many guns and weapons. Do you live in a war zone or the US or isn't that basicly the same thing? I'm sorry but I have so many questions. I love this blog and I'm really worried for you.

Normally I don’t answer anon questions that require me to step out of character, but if I keep referencing weird shit in my personal life I should probably explain that I am not a serial killer. So if you wanna know why I’m so well-armed, you can go ahead and click the readmore. 

Keep reading

On the evening of March 5, 1770, Private Hugh White of Major Pierce Butler’s Battalion Company, His Majesty’s 29th Regiment of Foot, stood guard at the sentry box located before the Customs House in Boston. A “bright moon-light” sky illuminated thesnow covered landscape before him, including the majestic brick Town House, the seat of English colonial government in Massachusetts.

Town House square was relatively quiet at 8 o’clock. Fate would intervene when Bartholomew Broaders and Edward Garrick, two teenage apprentices from Piedmont’s barber shop, escorted Ann Green, daughter to customs official Bartholomew Green, and the family’s maid, Mary Rogers, to their residence at the Customs House. Having bid their companions goodnight, the boys encountered Lieutenant-Captain John Goldfinch of the 14th Regiment of Foot. Recognizing the officer from his master’s shop, Garrick began taunting him with insults for not paying his bill. Knowing he had already paid it, Goldfinch shrugged off the incident and walked away. This incensed Private White who approached the boys to defend the officer’s reputation. When Garrick continued with his verbal assaults, White reprimanded the boy with a strike to the head with his firelock. This sent Garrick running away in tears. In response, a “motley rabble of saucy boys, negroes and molattoes, Irish teagues and outlandish jack tarrs” began filling Town House square. Swelling in number and armed with clubs and staves, they forced Private White against the Customs House door. Fearing for his life, he loaded his firelock and pleaded for the Main Guard to come to his assistance.

Town House square was now in a state of chaos. Snowballs, some oyster shells, multiple insults, and taunts of “Fire, why don’t you fire!” filled the air. Church bells began ringing. Additional residents emptied into the streets with fire bags and buckets believing a fire alarm had been called. Corporal William Wemms of Captain Ponsomby Molesworth’s Battalion Company, dressed in a surtout, forced his way through the angry mob and led a guard of six men from Captain John Corrance’s Grenadier Company to relieve the sentry. These soldiers included William Warren, the tallest, William McCauley, Matthew Kilroy, John Carroll, James Hartigan and Edward (Hugh) Montgomery. Reaching Private White, they formed a semi-circular line that allowed him to fall in next to Corporal Wemms. Unable to escape to the main guard house, they stood their ground with their bayonets leveled until Thomas Preston, Captain of the Guard, managed to reach them.

Seeing an officer in front of his men, Richard Palmes, a local merchant clothed in a cloth colored surtout, approached Preston. Placing his hand on the officer’s shoulder, he inquired if his men were loaded. Preston replied “with powder and ball”. Andrew, “a Negro Servant to Mr. Wendell”. was so close that he could hear their conversation. So was Jane Whitehouse. She later recalled that the “Centinal - then pushed me back. I step’d back to the corner. He bid me go away for I should be killed.” Another woman near Royal Exchange Lane engaged the “second Soldier from the right” in brief conversation.

Not all the inhabitants were so peaceful. Benjamin Burdick, constable of the Town House Watchmen, carried with him a Scottish broadsword that evening. Having had a bayonet pushed towards him, he later recalled “ I should have cut his head off if he had stepd out of his Rank to attack me again”. Instead, he struck the firelock of the “4th soldier from the corner” with all his might. As the crowd grew more and more agitated, a man in “blue or black plush trimd with gold” was seen walking back and forth behind the soldiers encouraging them to fire.

In a hail of flying ice and sticks, a shot rang out near Royal Exchange Lane. Someone screamed “Fire!” and Crispus Attucks, a mulatto sailor from Framingham, fell. Having witnessed the perpetrator fire, Richard Palmes struck Private Hugh Montgomery with his club. Knocking the firelock from his hands, he turned and hit Captain Preston across the arm as his right foot slipped in the snow. More men continued to fire as Montgomery recovered his firelock. Matthew Kilroy took aim at Samuel Gray, shooting the ropemaker through the head. When his body was recovered, his round hat laid by his side.

After the smoke cleared that cold winter’s evening, blood spattered the snow. Three men lay dead, a man and boy lay mortally wounded, six men were taken away to recover from their wounds and a day of infamy was recorded in the annals of American history.

Gregory S. Theberge, D.M.D.

Art by Don Troiani.
EXCLUSIVE: Take a Behind-the-Scenes Tour of the 'Outlander' Armoury to Discover Season 3 Secrets!
It's time to battle the Droughtlander!

We know that many fans are particularly parched during this extended Outlander hiatus, but we want to offer you a small sip of season three secrets.

Last December, we at ET traveled all the way over to Outlander’s Scotland-based sets and were treated to a special behind-the-scenes tour of the series awesomely intimidating armoury – and now we’re sharing that experience with you, plus an exclusive first-look at season three footage!

Outlander’s official armourer, Jim Elliot, has been the weapons props master since 2014 and has been a key factor in bringing those action-packed battle scenes to life.

Elliot admitted that it was a bit of a “daunting” task to prepare for season three’s Battle of Culloden because it’s one of the biggest (and most highly anticipated!) moments the series has had.

“We had four trucks of weapons [for the Battle of Culloden,]” Elliot explained. “Seven hundred weapons on a daily basis for two weeks [shooting on the field] and then picks-ups and green screens. It was long days, but enjoyable and I hope it looks great on screen.”

Outlander’s armoury walls are covered with a massive collection of every weapon imaginable including broadswords, axes, spears and targes, the distinctive circular shields used by Jacobites. The guns are safely under lock and key in nearby containers.

The massive room is located within the Outlander soundstage in Glasgow, Scotland just outside the doors that lead to the lavish set of the Fraser’s Lallybroch home. (Pssst! The armoury is also close to another set that was created just for season three, but we’re going to stay tight-lipped on that one for now…)

Press play on our exclusive tour above to get a glimpse at the Scottish broadsword they had custom-made for Sam Heughan, plus some special season three sneak peeks of Rupert’s ax from the Battle of Culloden and cave-dwelling Jamie’s bow and arrow!

Listen up! This here is Churchill. Jack Churchill. Fighting Jack Churchill. Mad Jack. A British Army officer that stormed through WWII with -  bagpipes, a basket-hilted Scottish broadsword and a longbow.

He is known for the motto: “Any officer who goes into action without his sword is improperly dressed.” It is claimed that Churchill also carried out the last recorded longbow and arrow killing in action, shooting a German NCO in 1940 in a French village during the Battle of France. x

Rant: Failure, Doubles, and Weapons Chauvinism

This rant is the result of idiots on Facebook rehashing a pair of the silliest arguments known to HEMA-nity:

  1. “My weapon is better than your weapon”
  2. “Doubles are a sign that the fencing is completely terrible”

to produce a yet sillier Argument 3: The Synthesising:

3. If there’s more doubles in your weapons tournament than in mine, it means my choice of weapon is better than yours.

Now, none of these three arguments are valid. None of them.

I’ve talked before a little bit here before about why I like the longsword, and why I find basket-hilted weapons (or, worse, open-gripped weapons with no hand shots scored!) less satisfying to watch or to fence with, but that’s a matter of personal taste. I define a set of criteria I approve of, and longsword comes out above, say, Scottish broadsword or rapier. Welcome to the Is-Ought gap. Saying “I don’t like that” provides no grounds in itself to criticise others for enjoying it.

Also, these arguments are usually rolled out by folks who’re butthurt than longsword has more practitioners, competitors and profile than their weapon, and who’d rather be haters than make their own thing comparably awesome. S

That’s kind of been dealt with here on this tumblr before. Today let’s talk about doubles. By a double, we mean two fencers strike each other simultaneously.

There are basically three ways you can arrive at a double:

  1. Failure in Observation
  2. Failure in Decision
  3. Failure in Execution

Failure in Observation is the simplest - the fencer doesn’t realise what’s going on because he doesn’t notice important details. For example, his opponent is ready to attack rather than unprepared, or the distance between his head and the opponent’s weapon is shorter than he thought, or his opponent’s feint isn’t a feint at all but a committed attack. If you don’t know what’s going on, you’re unlikely to make the correct fencing action for the situation. Simples. Sometimes one or both fencers don’t realise what’s about to happen, and doubles result. Of course, most fencing consists of lying to your opponent about what you’re going to do. So if people misread the situation, it’s not praiseworthy fencing, but can we really condemn them for it?

Failure in Decision is more complicated. It’s where a fencer reads the situation correctly, then selects the wrong tool. Attacking on an open line against an incoming attack is usually the one that results in doubles, although arguably some attacking against an opponent prepared to attack is reckless if it leads to a double. Making a poor decision deserves to be viewed poorly. It’s not the only way to double, though.

Failure in Execution is where a fencer chose the right move for the situation, but failed to pull it off. You saw their attack coming and you tried to do the right thing - but you failed. This could produce a double when, say, you slip the leg cut to counter with a head thrust and your leg is just an inch too far in. Or when you decide to counter thrust their incoming attack, and fail to clear it. Now, it’s still a failure. If I’m to assign moral responsibility for a double where I knew there was an attack coming in, and failed to deal with it, it’s on me. Even if I stabbed back.

Priority systems (hello Paris Open, and hello MOF!) are designed to show who made an error in the case of doubles, although they’re hard to make work reliably in practice and many in HEMA remain deliberately ignorant to how they work - the better to complain about “unmartial sports fencing” while they themselves cannot fence half competently  never mind martially.

As a fencer, or a coach, it’s important to be aware of the different ways that you can produce a double, so that you can correctly address why your fencing is producing double hits. There are tactics one can attempt if opponents seem determined to produce doubles - for example to force the suicidal opponent to lead with an attack, then beat their blade hard and attack, or to feint an attack and be ready to parry-riposte the suicidal double they throw in exchange.

Too many HEMA-ists, though, get obsessed with “doubles are bad fencing”, trying to construct rulesets that disqualify those whose matches have double hits. Double hits are certainly not good fencing, but neither is getting hit without replying, or getting hit first but landing an afterblow. In fact, tournaments which penalise simultaneous hits while encouraging (even allowing to score positively!) afterblows are really not themselves trying to encourage “martially valid” fencing.