Rating: 
Summary: A Swashbucking Good Book
Review: Gentlemen shake hands to show they are not going to cut each other's arms off, "... to show we are not reaching for our swords; a gentleman offers his right arm because at one time his sword was at his left hip." So writes Richard Cohen in _By the Sword: A History of Gladiators, Musketeers, Samurai, Swashbucklers, and Olympic Champions_ (Random House). So with our veneer of social custom, we are all duelists underneath. The other great evidence of our fascination for swordplay is the movies. Swordplay did not vanish with Errol Flynn, _The Three Musketeers_, and _The Mark of Zorro_. It endures in _Star Wars_ and _The Lord of the Rings_. "Filmmakers have found," Cohen writes, "that for the sheer excitement of pitting hero against villain in one-on-one combat there is still a place for the swordfight." Cohen's book is a perfect way to realize just how fascinated we are with swords, and to learn more about real dueling, movie swordfights, and competitive fencingThe deadly world of dueling takes up many of the pages in this sizable book, but it is relieved by comedy many times. For instance, a nobleman in seventeenth century Naples fought twenty duels to prove that Dante was a greater poet than Ariosto; finally, he admitted that he had read the works of neither. Trial by combat was governmentally sanctioned because, as he does in wars, God would decide who ought to win. The duel of chivalry gave way to the duel for honor, which became fashionable in the sixteenth century, and thousands died as the middle class embraced the blood sport. Among those who attempted to take dueling from a blood sport to a competitive one was Henry VIII, who set up a royal academy of fencing. Of course, he was interested in training warriors, but the instructors he licensed as "Masters of the Noble Science of Defense" organized "prizefights." Thus began the still-continuing reign of the fencing masters. Among the fencers noted here are Mussolini, General Franco, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and even Harry Truman. Fencers have remained relatively clear of sports drug abuse, there is a long history of cheating that is a recurrent aspect of the sport's culture. Swords are jimmied and competitions get bought and sold, fixed, or thrown for the benefit of future concessions. Such are the difficulties in a sport born of an emphasis on honor. Cohen is a long time editor, and his smooth writing shows it. He is also a saber champion who has been on the British Olympic team, and his enthusiasm is present on every page of an elegant book whose devotion to an arcane endeavor can be appreciated by those who know nothing of the sport. He says, "Although nowadays I am at best no more than an occasional irritant to a top fencer," he has provided here superb service to the sport he obviously loves.
Rating: 
Summary: Full of mistakes
Review: I am surprised by the extreme number of basic factual errors in this book. In a single reading of the first two chapters I identified numerous errors including the following, 1)"A horse's armor could weigh up to 450 pounds" - more like 60
2)"parries were not attempted" - the world's oldest fencing manual (Mss I.33 c.1300 - which the author refers to) is full of parries.
3)"the use of heavy armor and heavy weapons allowed only simple movements, forcing contestants to concentrate on one blow at a time, so that complicated phrases were impossible." - complicated fencing phrases are described in medieval fencing manuals, including those referenced by the author.
4)"Up until the start of the sixteenth century there were few solid principles of how best to fight with swords. Masters, mainly army veterans, passed on a hodgepodge of techniques" - There are approximately 50 medieval fencing manuals, all of which describe advanced fencing systems that conform to the same fundamental principles of timing, distance and line that underly modern fencing.
5)"Johannes Lecktuchner, a famous master at Nuremburg. Lektuchner's treatise is full of hints about feints, secret thrusts, and surprise parries." - the man's name was Liechtenauer and he described an incredibly subtle and sophisticated system that dominated central Europe for 250 years. The system is described in exquisite detail in Christian Tobler's excellent book "Secrets of German Medieval Swordsmanship".
6)Of Talhoffer's treatise "it is as much a manual for survival as a book about fencing." - As the word fencing is derived from the word defence, this statement is tautological.
7)"Marozzo was the first to establish a regular system. Parrying had not been invented:" - despite being illustrated ad nauseum in treatises over 200 years earlier, treatises which the author writes about? Nobody thought to put his sword in the way of the other chap's attack? Honestly, what does the author take his ancestors for?
8)Carranza "in 1582 published his country's earliest known treatise on fencing... The book, dedicated to his king, Philip II, propounds a thesis so abstruse as to almost to defy understanding." - there are five earlier Spanish works and there are modern practitioners who fence using Carranza's system. The system is extremely practical and was acknowledged as such by authors like Silver (who the author referred to).
9)On Thibault's treatise "It was also, like Carranza's textbooks, quite unusable" - which apart from being wrong is just plain rude.
10)"Henry VIII invited the best-known teachers in the country to join a new, royally sanctioned academy." No actually, he granted them letters of patent, a quite different thing.
11)There is no evidence that Jeronimo was Rocco Bonetti's son. 12)Austin Bagger was not an English master.
13)Toby Silver was George Silver's brother, not his son.
14)There is no evidence to suggest that the English fencer Cheese murdered the Italian Jeronimo in cold blood. The only evidence we have of the encounter describes the events quite differently. These are a few errors that could be addressed briefly. There are far more. I'm sorry to have to be so harsh. While it upsets me to have to give such a bad review to a fencing book, it would upset me more if people bought it and believed what they read in it. Yours Sincerely
Stephen Hand
Editor, SPADA,
The Journal of Historical Fencing
Rating:
Summary: The author writes:
Review: I have read with interest the various reviews above, and following the long critique by Mr Hand have been in correspondence with him. One or two of his points are well made - although he is also wrong on several. It is clear from the book, I believe, that a fully developed SYSTEM of parries was a mid-16th century introduction. Mr Hand has since finished the book, and was generous to me about 18 of its 20 chapters. His main points concern the efficiency of the Spanish system taught by Carranza and the high quality of late medieval swordplay. I believe he is wrong about both, and explain why in my book. My views are born from my own experience (Carranza's teaching is largely incomprehensible) and from reading the main authorities; Mr Hand, for all his enthusiasm, is the odd man out here. The two other short, critical reviews, citing no evidence, I cannot deal with. Varlets both.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent reading for the fencer or military history buff
Review: I know you're not supposed to refer to other reviews, but I strongly disagree with the preceeding reviews, which are pedantic and factually wrong (horse armor far exceeded 60 lbs, early sword technique blocked with shield or armor rather than parries, for starters). The book has been praised by renowned authors like Keegan who know about martial history, and is one of the few to connect swordsmanship from its origins in war, through the duel, up to today's sport fencing. From the perspective of an Olympic fencer it shows rare glimpses into the minds and personalities of great fencers. The stories of the competitiveness and even cheating that go on in Olympic fencing, the fascinating tales of historical events at the Berlin Games and the espionage conducted by Olympic greats, are by themselves more than enough reason to buy. The book is highly entertaining and belongs on the bookshelf next to the volumes by Aldo Nadi and Peter Westbrook. I am not the author, nor have I met him - I'm a fencer who thinks this is an outstanding read.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating, absorbing view into the world of the sword
Review: I'm with the reviewers that loved the book. It shows rarely seen aspects of sword fighting and its modern day descendant of fencing. I enjoyed the historical perspective (I expect the author is largely accurate since he studied original documents). Pedantry aside, I especially enjoyed the stories of modern high-level fencing: both the glorious and the down-and-dirty. Long time fencers will recognise familiar parts of their world, and non-fencers will get a chance to learn about the sport and the martial origins that make it special.
Rating:
Summary: By the Sword - a user's guide
Review: Richard Cohen's recent release, 'By the Sword', must be the best book I've read on the fencing process. As an experienced international athlete and publisher, the author combines his knowledge as an experienced blade user with an eye for a good story. While his largely anecdotal approach may frustrate academic historians, it lends itself well to explaining the process of fencing to those who have never held a sword. The context of the fencing process is something Cohen captures better than many treatises that have been consigned to the history of armed combat. That the sport has a history is important, but only to a point. This is something the author clearly appreciates. He has obviously read historical and more recent works as a fencer; a fact that may disturb the crustier historians who'd prefer a drier objectivity. Possibly even a pedantic accuracy. But I suspect the author's approach of placing historical bladework in the context of the rules and conventions of today's game is more likely to yield returns for those who see themselves as participants. Though this book will appeal to fencers, the author has written for a much wider audience. I found the contents list covered a range of topics that often come up in coversation with non-fencing friends. For instance, staged bladework for movies such as the most recent James Bond. Chapters dealing with duelling, espionage and organised cheating represent a darker side that continues to fascinate the non-fencing public, to the dismay of the sporting community. Richard Cohen, former olympian, is still an active sabre fencer.
Perhaps it takes a veteran sabreur to fully appreciate his history of swordskills. This book kept me awake until I'd read the last page during a longhaul flight. I look forward to its sequel.
Rating:
Summary: To Know and Love the Sport
Review: Someone once said "to win the game is great, to play the game is greater and to love the game is greatest." In Richard Cohen's book "By the Sword" it is clear that the author truly loves the game. If you have been a fencer or are yet a fencer you to will love this wonderful book. If you are not or never have been a fencer you will learn about the history of fencing, the excitement of fencing and even some of the problems that the sport is struggling to overcome after thousands of years. It was and is a martial art often engaged in for life and death in the past to now an Olympic sport for what often seems like life and death in competition on the fencing strip.. As an American I have often felt badly that there was little reference material available to an American participant or lover of this ancient sport, as it modernizes through technology, to become more fascinating and TV watchable to the average sport fan. This book changes much of that chasm of knowledge. Cohen, an Olympic fencer, understands the skills required, the spirit needed and the inner glow and satisfaction that fencing can bring to you. As a history of the sword and its uses during the centuries this is a must read. For an individual interested in the sport of fencing it is an inspiration. En garde!!
Rating: 
Summary: A delightful romp through blade history!
Review: This book is just a wonderful read! I realize that other reviewers have taken exception to parts of the work, but speaking as a stage combat practitioner and just a swashbuckling fool, it was a treat! This is among the most accesible books on the sword I have ever read, and the author is to be commended for the scope of the work, as well as the clear understandable way it is written. So if you love swords, Dumas, duels and derring-do, get a copy, you will love it!
Rating: 
Summary: Something to keep in mind while reading -- check his facts
Review: This could have been a definitive book, a book of fencing for our times -- but it is riddled with numerous factual/historical inaccuracies. Just two examples a few pages apart: Cohen writes (on page 151) that the film "Duel at Ichijoji (1964)" was the "first of that trilogy" -- when the title is actually "Duel at Ichijoji Temple" and it is the second of the trilogy and the year should be 1956. A major blunder though is Yukio Mishima being called a "Nobel-laureate" (p. 155). Strange that none of the professional reviewers picked up on that one or warns readers about similar errors. It's been an annoying read, having to second-guess and stop to double check Cohen's facts.
Rating:
Summary: Try Parrying That, Rousseau!
Review: This is a very enjoyable book on "swordsmanship" through the ages, with fascinating historical tidbits on the equipment and accoutrements, and many exciting, funny (and horrific) anecdotes concerning fencers and duellists. The book has many wonderful footnotes, which alone almost justify the purchase price. Here, for example, is one on armor: "It was never called 'a suit of armor,' a phrase that arose only about 1600, but always 'harness.' The expression 'he died in harness' does not mean that a man was, at death, doing his job like a horse, but that he was wearing full armor. 'Armed' originally meant wearing armor- not carrying a weapon." In another footnote in the section on dueling, Mr. Cohen comments favorably on the Greenland Inuits manner of dueling: When a Greenlander considers himself to have been insulted, he challenges the offending party to a "duel of wits." Each man, supported by seconds, composes a satirical song. The songs are sung in front of an audience, which acts as a jury and votes for a winner. After that, the matter is considered to be settled and the men must be friendly towards one another. (This is certainly a lot more civilized and a lot less deadly than the traditional duel!) The book covers every area you could possibly want to know about- there are sections on knights, duellists, samurai, musketeers, swordplay in the movies, Olympic competitors, sword manufacture, injuries, etc. In the section on samurai Mr. Cohen mentions that it was common practice for the warriors to test the sharpness of their new blades by hacking up the corpses of criminals who had been executed! The more corpses you could chop up before having to stop to sharpen the blade, the better the weapon. In the section on the various types of blades, the author explains that the curved weapon known as the scimitar was invented by the horsemen of the Near East. While fighting from horseback it was much easier to swing your arm in an arc and slash away than it was to try to jab someone with a straight blade- hence, the advantages of a long, curved blade. In the section on the movies, Mr. Cohen talks about the sequence in "The Empire Strikes Back" where Darth Vader fought Luke Skywalker. Real swords were used, made with carbon-fiber blades, painted with reflective paint to simulate laser light. The Darth Vader costume was so bulky and restrictive, with poor visibility due to the helmet, that the filmmakers were concerned that Mark Hamill (who was wearing no protective clothing) could be injured if the sword sequences were done with a regular stuntman. So, they brought in an expert swordmaster- Bob Anderson, who had been a British professional champion and British national coach. The section on fencing injuries is not for the squeamish, as Mr. Cohen talks about the dangers of broken blades and the rather unpleasant experience of having a sword lodged in your throat or thrust through your eye. The reason I gave the book 4 stars rather than 5 is that I felt the book could have been a bit shorter- some of the sections ran on a bit longer than necessary and could have been "tightened up" with better editing. Also, the last 200 pages or so, which is about 40% of the book, dealt with Olympic fencing, modern competition and coaches, etc. It may be a sign of my preference for the earlier historical material, but since the book is supposed to be a history of all aspects of swordsmanship I thought this was too much space to devote to just one area of the subject. Still, as you can tell from what I've mentioned previously, this book covers a lot of ground and is an interesting (as well as just a plain fun-to-read) book. I probably should end by mentioning the title of my review. It is an exact quote of what the revolutionary judge said to Augustin Rousseau, fencing master to the royal family, when he sentenced poor Mr. Rousseau to the guillotine in 1793!
|
