Hell in a Handbasket

really highlights how the underlying aims, assumptions, and goals of the styles appear to be quite different; the kendo artist seemed to be trying to achieve something rather different from the western fencer entirely. maybe it is the armor the samurai wore that forced their style to be different. the kendo artist seemed much less fluid in his movements, more straight-line hard-punch forward-and-through. then again, that could be a misreading of mine thanks to my own complete lack of training in all this.

the kendo artist seemed much less fluid in his movements, more straight-line hard-punch forward-and-through.

That is exactly the impression I had!

In the interest of full disclosure, I dabbled in both European style fencing and kendo about 20 years ago.

By "European style fencing" I mean that I learned the basics of using the foil, which was pretty much a springy bit of stiff wire that you would use to poke the other guy in the torso. Hits on the arms, legs, or head were ignored.

I soon left the sport far behind because I was interested in something that could be useful in actual combat. Foil fencing most assuredly wasn't combat applicable, although I could detect faint echoes of how the style developed from those long ago days when people did it for real.

Kendo was certainly combat oriented, and I found it to be a forceful and powerful martial art. The problem was that it was extremely rigid, with the student having to keep working at the same movements or exercises long after they had mastered them. The student's progress was not based on their actual ability. I left that sport behind after I lost a bout because I wasn't screaming convincingly enough, even though my opponent never managed to score a touch.

He could scream like nobody's business, though.

James

Foil fencing most assuredly wasn't combat applicable, although I could detect faint echoes...

The conventions of foil are derived from good practice in a small-sword duel; thrust for the body as this is most likely to incapacitate the opponent (and is easiest to hit under stress) and make sure you parry rather than counter-attack once he straightens his arm or you'll both stab each other simultaneously resulting in a 'contretemps' and probably a double kill.

I remember one time talking to someone from the SCA about this. He said that there were people in his group who tried to use Kendo at their meets against those using European fighting styles. They usually lost.

By the way, the fight in your video isn't even typical. The reason the guy fighting with the European style would use his sword one handed is because he'd be carrying a shield on his other arm, which would unbalance the contest even more.

In a real combat situation (absent firearms) the Japanese weapon I'd want to be using is a naginata. Against a trained naginata fighter, that European fighter would have lost. But that's because the Naginata has a significant reach advantage, being a pole arm.

Foil fencing as it developed wasn't intended to be a battlefield combat style. It was for duels.

I had some issues with that ki-scream.

I found that they didn't argue with my strikes after I riposted the opponent's shinai out of the ring. People learned really fast to keep both hands on the shinai around me ... a ripost to the tsuba is an effective way launch a shinai into low earth orbit.

All techniques and styles have merit, all of them ... no one at my old dojo even considered an attack on the weapon until I started abusing it ...

Against a trained naginata fighter, that European fighter would have lost.

The same applies to the Naginata as applies to Katanas vs. Western swords, i.e. it is not inherently better than Western polearms, of which we have many. This page has more information.

Foil fencing as it developed wasn't intended to be a battlefield combat style. It was for duels.

The foil (known as a “fleuret” in the 18th century) was a training tool for the small-sword. It was said by some masters at the time that the “small-sword is the call of honour; the back-sword the call of duty.” I.e. the former sword was for the duel and the latter sword was carried to war. I teach the use of both of these swords (plus pugilism in case neither are available ;-).

The Western fencer in the Youtube video looks to me to be using a system that looks similar to generic 18th century English back-sword play. In this case a shield would not be used although Page's treatise of 1746 does discuss targe use (the provenance of this is disputed).

What if the "European" also held a short sword or a dagger (or another weapon, like a small axe) in his free left hand? Seems to me that he'd have both offensive and defensive advantages, and be a lot more lethal.

Re: Polearms

link

An off-hand weapon is used in many Western styles, but a short weapon in the off-hand (e.g. the dagger) is not useful for parrying blows as the sword can wide-space it and strikes with too much force. What it is useful for is controlling the opponent's sword after having parried it with one's own, and also for stabbing him if he comes to grappling range.
It used to be a bit of a problem for 16th/17th century rapier duellists if they both had daggers and came to the close as the result was likely to be a double kill as they stabbed each other simultaneously with the daggers.
My personal preference is to avoid the off-hand weapon, although I know plenty of people (mostly rapier fencers) who swear by it.

Unfortunately, this video gives little or no insight into any sort of combat between a European knight and a Japanese samurai. Both of the participants acted upon what they learned, which would always be the case when encountering opponents. The only problem here is the overall difference in fundamentals of both teachings.

If you closely examine the kendoist in the video, you'll notice he'll leave himself "open" after each strike. This is because the Kendo match system is based on point-hit scoring, where a match is settled instantly once a person is hit. Once the kendoist believes he has sufficiently struck and scored, he can follow through (Zanshin) and proceed to the next round. The second thing you'll notice is the Kendoist striking the most armored parts of his opponent (namely the helmet and the gauntlets). This is because the legal Kendo strike zones is the top portion of the head, the wrists, the belly, and the throat. Just like foil fencing, Kendo follows strict and specific sporting rules.

On another note, Kendo does not fully employ the advantages of a katana, which includes many different techniques, guards, stances, etc. These instead can be found in Kenjutsu, the original martial art practiced by traditional samurai. A better situation would be to have a person studied in the art of Kenjutsu against a European knight. This would have both participants focus on the same goal: To strike, move, counterattack, and defend in the same manner.