Last weekend, I had the opportunity to return to Uhuburg Castle in Helen, Georgia. I always love my time out there seeing friends, teaching classes, and introducing people to the wonderful world of HEMA. It was also a great experience that allowed me to clear up some common misconceptions about the Middle Ages. 

If you ask most people to picture the Middle Ages, they'll probably imagine a world of superstition, illiteracy, and ignorance—a time before science, before reason, and before sophisticated ways of understanding the world. It's an enduring stereotype, but it's also one of history's greatest misconceptions. Medieval scholars built universities, preserved and expanded classical knowledge, developed intricate systems of logic, and created remarkably sophisticated methods for organizing, remembering, and transmitting information. Far from being intellectually stagnant, the medieval world was obsessed with knowledge and with finding reliable ways to preserve it. Some of this knowledge they aimed to preserve were fencing techniques.

Today, we will explore the world of the craft of memory, or Memoria, and how it relates to historical fencing. However, I want to give a huge shoutout to Keith Farrell for inspiring this lesson. While writing my book, he introduced me to the Medieval Craft of Memory, a fantastic book that helped me better understand why I.33 may have been written. So in the spirit of passing it forward, let's get into the video!

Happy Fourth of July, everyone! Have you ever wondered about fencing and martial combat during the Revolutionary War? Are you looking for a way to blend your historical fencing enthusiasm with the celebration of the United States’ two-hundred and fiftieth birthday? Then, do I have the blog post for you!
​
Today, we will be traveling back in time and exploring what martial skills a non-commissioned officer of the Continental Army might have learned around the time of the Revolution. This blog post is combined with a fun workshop we did at our fencing club to celebrate the Fourth of July. So, grab your tricorn hats and take a swig of switchel as we explore the history and martial arts around the Revolutionary War!

I want to give a huge shoutout to our photographer, Zane Kupper, and to Purpleheart Armoury for providing the gear for this workshop! Also, This workshop would not have been possible Without the help of Kyle Norris who did the deep-dive on the sabre system we selected for this workshop. Thank you all for helping this workshop come to life!

The day is July 4th, 1779. The Battle of Lexington and Concord was over four years ago, and the newly formed country you find yourself serving is entrenched in a bloody war. The Continental Army has seen its fair share of victories from the Battle of Trenton to the surrender of General Burgoyne at Saratoga. However, the war seems far from over. The British still occupy New York City and have recently captured Savannah. On top of that, a nation that was once an enemy is now seen as an ally and provides pivotal training and supplies to your fledgling nation’s army. After a couple of years of service, you have earned the rank of non-commissioned officer (NCO). With your new commission, you are studying the Valley Forge system in your Blue Book for your roles and responsibilities. You are expected to ensure the officers’ commands were done properly, drills were performed satisfactorily, and that your men maintain order during battle. On top of that, there are new gear requirements:

​While you were expecting a new uniform based on the new standards, the reality is that the new uniforms are delayed, so you don a red sash over your old uniform to signify your new rank. However, the rank does come with the carrying of a sword, a new piece of equipment to you… and even more weight on the battlefield.

While less impactful than the bayonet, swords also still proved to be effective tools on the battlefield. There are many accounts of officers raising their swords to rally troops and to signal their command during combat. Furthermore, the light dragoons, a mounted light cavalry unit fielded by the United States and commanded by Col. Benjamin Tallmadge, participated in several cavalry actions with swords as their primary weapon  (Tallmadge, 1858).

Due to difficulties in production and supply, swords were not as uniform for the Continental Army as later European armies would be in periods more commonly studied in the historical fencing. Based on the catalog presented in Swords and Blades of the American Revolution by George G. Neumann, popular swords of the conflict on both sides were hangers, hunting swords or cuttoes, short sabres, spadroons, small swords, basket-hilted swords, sabers, and naval cutlasses. George Washington famously carried a silver and ivory-hilted cuttoe in the later years of the Revolutionary War (Mount Vernon, 2026). To celebrate the Fourth of July, Purpleheart Armoury has created a synthetic trainer modeled off of one of George Washington's hangers for all those interested in experimenting with this type of sword.

​Admittedly, the days of swordsmanship ruling the battlefield were long in the past by the Revolutionary War. However, officers and aristocrats still found themselves dueling to defend their honor, though, admittedly, more often with pistols in the United States than with swords (Neumann, 1973). Furthermore, like their European counterparts, the American colonies also had their own fair share of fencing guilds. The techniques of the various colonial fencing schools varied, and it is difficult to say which sources were being used. Boston featured a fencing school that printed advice on the backsword that appears to overlap with the techniques of William Hope and Donald McBane, but it is not stated definitively enough to suggest those were the systems being taught (Miller, 2009).

So perhaps as a newly commissioned NCO, you have been provided with a sabre and seek ways to learn how to use it. Swordsmanship is not part of the regular exercise and drills of the Continental Army, so you have to seek other avenues for learning fencing. You could learn from the other officers in the camp or potentially attend a fencing school in a city you are near.

For the workshop, we chose to focus on Thomas Page’s The Use of the Broad Sword, published in 1746. This system was relatively new and may have been taught around the time of the Revolutionary War, and it may have been based on Scottish swordsmanship observed during the Jacobite Rebellion. That war led to many British military lessons and tactics, which were then applied in the French and Indian War, during which many colonists learned the art of war before the Revolutionary War.

​What was most interesting to us about Thomas Page’s sabre was the differences between it and the systems we primarily study, Henry Angelo. The main differences come from Page’s under-utilization of the lunge compared to Henry Angelo. This results in more passing steps being used, which come with guards designed for left or right leg forward, as opposed to Angelo’s dominant leg forward guards.

While the sword was more of a symbol of status, the bayonet was a critical battlefield tool during the Revolutionary War, and as an NCO picked from the ranks of soldiers, you would be very familiar with the musket and bayonet. At the Battle of Bunker Hill, the British army successfully took the Massachusetts militia’s position using bayonet charges (National Park Services, 2026). This engagement highlighted the colonists’ lack of bayonets, which led to the Continental Congress in February of 1776, forming a committee to contract the creation of muskets and bayonets for the United Colonies (Continental Congress, 1776).

One of the major changes Steuben and the Valley Forge system brought was the professional use of bayonet for combat. Steuben believed that “The American soldier, never having used this arm, had no faith in it, and never used it but to roast his beefsteak, and indeed often left it at home” (Landrigan, 2026). Bayonet drilling became a major feature in the Continental Army after 1778. This was a major shift and began to give them the tools needed to meet the British Army on the field.

​Joseph Plumb Martin’s memoirs from the Revolutionary War give us a rather unique perspective on the bayonet. Martin was a soldier, as opposed to an officer, in the Continental Army, so his primary melee weapon was the bayonet, as opposed to the sword, like Col. Benjamin Tallmadge discussed previously. He participated in the battle of Stony Point, one of the most decisive U.S victories in the war, which critically relied on bayonet for key action (Maloy, 2026). Martin describes how light infantry entered Stony Point with fixed bayonets and their muskets unloaded, as to not have an incident that would alert the enemy army of their raid (Martin, 1830). His memoirs also features less exciting jobs as a soldier with bayonet such as standing guard at camp.

​Interestingly, Bayonet techniques were not formally viewed from the individual perspective until the 19th century, such as the techniques taught in the Bayonet Exercise Manual for the U.S Army in 1852. That manual includes specific guards and parries that an individual could use in a bayonet fight (United States War Department, 1852). Instead, bayonet combat was looked at as a psychological tool for breaking armies. This led to most bayonet exercises at the time of the Revolutionary War to focus on maintaining formation while marching with a bayonet, as well as how to strike from the line with the bayonet. Some drills developed by the British prior to the war, such as the Culloden Drill, included instructions on how to attack when in an infantry line and in charge. In that instance, the drill was to attack to the right rather than the left, striking an opponent’s side not covered by a shield, a tactic commonly seen during the Jacobite Rebellion (Ritchie, 2023). These types of drills also sometimes included advice to not lunge with the bayonet because a lunge would put the attacker out of formation, resulting in them being uncovered or defended by the soldiers on their left or right.

I hope you enjoyed this little deep dive into the history surrounding the arms of NCO’s for the Continental Army of the Revolutionary War. What fascinated me about the sources surrounding this manuscript was the contrasts with later-period sources on the same weapons. It highlights the shifting of warfare that was experienced after the Napoleonic Wars and also the shifts the United States had to make to achieve victory in its independence.

Most importantly, the club had fun!

Thus concludes the memoirs of Col. Benjamin Tallmadge. What a beautiful and interesting look into the mind of someone not interested in dueling, a rare perspective than generally seen in the sources that inform historical fencing.

Happy Fourth of July, everyone! Have a fun and safe weekend, and I’ll see you for my next blog post.

De Re Militari is a collection of manuscripts written around the 5th century by Flavius Vegetius Renatus. The manuscript covers numerous military topics, including leadership, training, discipline, tactics, and more. The four-book manuscript was incredibly popular throughout its time and well into the Middle Ages. In fact, even today, military scholars find value in De Re Militari. But could it benefit a fencing master like the ones who authored some of the foundational manuscripts of HEMA?

Today, come along on my journey as I highlight some key takeaways from De Re Militari through the lens of a High Medieval fencing master. What lessons would I apply if I were paid to train people for judicial duels? I will be using the 2019 translation of Vegetius’ work edited by Harper-McLaughlin Adet, which includes all four books, so come along as we explore this interesting topic!

Before we can begin exploring the manuscript, it is critical that I set the stage for the lens through which we will read. I will be reading this book as if I were a fencing master paid to train people for judicial duels, similar to Fiore dei Liberi or Hans Talhoffer. I will also assume I am following the judicial duel bylaws as described in the Saxon Mirror, which provide a period of time to work with a client before their duel.
​
I will also not be exploring the value of this manuscript from a general combat perspective or a knightly one. After all, the popularity of this manuscript throughout history speaks for itself in its military value.
So enjoy this fictional tale of notes from a High Medieval fencing master decomposing De Re Militari for application to his profession!

Vegetius opens his work with “The Selection and Training of New Levies” and focuses on what makes good soldiers. Right off the bat, we have our first piece of sage wisdom: “Achieving victory in war does not depend entirely upon numbers or simple courage; only skill and discipline will ensure it.” Fortunately for me, in nearly all judicial duels, at least in the Holy Roman Empire, I will not need to worry about numerical disadvantages. However, the success of my pupils is a direct reflection of my tutelage. If I am going to take a client, I am going to want to ensure that they have the potential to win. After all, you never hear the other fencing masters bragging about the clients they trained who lost, but the people of the towns certainly know. Based on Vegetius’ advice, I will focus my efforts on clients who show skill and discipline. Only they will be worth dedicating my time to.

Along with skill and discipline, the client's physique must also be considered. While weapons may equalize some parts of a fight, there are still physical advantages some may have over others. Vegetius says that quality recruits “have a lively eye, should carry his head erect, his chest should be broad, his shoulders muscular and brawny, his fingers long, his arms strong, his waist small, his shape easy, his legs and feet rather nervous than fleshy.” Before I take a client to train them for their duel, I should gauge their physical attributes to see if they have precursors of qualities that Vegetius highlights.

Vegetius also describes professions of levies that should be avoided. Interestingly, people like fishermen and bird hunters are to be omitted from service. This is certainly something I should keep an eye on. Afterall, how one makes their money may reflect some of the skills and discipline they have.

Another interesting idea is the concept of not giving someone a military mark until they have proven worthy. As Vegetius puts it, “Because many, though promising enough in appearance, are found very unfit upon trial.” Maybe I should test my clients before I sign any contracts to work with them. Just because they look to be quality, does not mean they have the mindset required to thrive in a duel.

Points of emphasis are made on the initial training to exercise daily, to run, and to swim (weather permitting).  These are all good aspects that I should incorporate into my curriculum for preparing my clients. It does them no good to know how to swing a sword if they do not have the heart and lungs for the activity.

A fascinating detail that Vegetius makes is on the use of round shields and wooden swords that are twice as heavy as the ones they would be using. He even goes on to explain how training with the pell with these heavier tools is good for soldiers and gladiators. What are my clients if not the contemporary equivalent of the Roman Gladiator?
​
Curiously, Vegetius says to teach the thrust over the cut with the sword. He highlights that the Romans mocked those who trained to use the edge of the sword and that a cut delivered even with force hardly kills. There is certainly some truth in that a thrust is more likely to end a duel, but is a maiming blow with a sword, not just as valuable in a duel? I know some masters who emphasize the cut while others emphasize the thrust. For me, it depends on the weapon and the style in which my opponent is deploying against me.

This book covers the establishment and organization of a legion. Vegetius even explores the difference between the Roman legions and the Auxiliaries they deployed. If I were to be employed as a captain of a guard or even lead my own Condottieri division, I could see great value in this book of Vegetius. However, most of this book does not seem applicable to training my clients.
​
However, Book II does include an entire section on the drilling of troops that I find fascinating. Vegetius advises training troops in the morning and afternoon, and highlights training with a wooden sword. Troops are to train against “imaginary antagonists on all sides and to aim at the sides, feet, or head, both with the point and edge of the sword.” It is true that I must prep my client for all sorts of scenarios before they enter their duel. You never know what an opponent may deploy against you, so prepping accordingly is critical.

This book is all about dispositions for action and includes things like the size of an army, encamping armies, crossing rivers, and more. One of these sections covers “Means of Preserving It in Health”. It goes without saying that a proper diet for my client and myself is a cornerstone of success. A fantastic quote from Vegetius is “…Little can be expected from men who have both the enemy and diseases to struggle with.” I must ensure my client is eating well. I should familiarize myself with the four humors if I am to better monitor my client’s health while I am under contract with them.

“It is essential to know the character of the enemy and of their principal officers…” Well said, Vegetius! Training my client in martial combat for their duel is not the only way I can help prepare them. It should be easy enough to learn about the opponent they will face. After all, this is a judicial duel and legalities in the proceedings. However, I should invest in learning who they hired to train them for this duel. If I know my client’s opponent and who is training them, I may be able to focus my client’s training on techniques and tactics their opponent will deploy. Discretion in this matter is of the utmost important. I can only imagine what it might do to my reputation if another Fencing Master knew I was gathering information on them or their client...

Venetius also makes a point to say we should learn from others. I think this is an excellent idea to improve my own technique and what I can share with my clients. I have heard tales of some fencing masters who traveled great distances, and at great expense to themselves, to learn from various masters to hone their skills. This is something I should do as well. It is always good to get other perspectives on my trade.
​
Finally, Book III includes the statement that “men must be sufficiently tried before they are led against the enemy.” It is my duty as their fencing master to test them and hone their skills. I do not want them to encounter a technique they have not seen before in their duel when it matters most. I must add variety and creativity to what I train my clients in order to maximize their chances of success.

​The last book of De Re Militari discusses defenses, sieges, and naval warfare. In truth, I did not find much value in this book in regard to its application to judicial dueling. However, I did come across a word I liked the sound of: Obsessi. It is the Latin word for siege. It has a nice ring to it, and I may name a category of techniques after it…

There is so much we can learn from contemporary manuscripts about our normal fencing sources. De Re Militari was almost certainly read by some of the minds behind our sources, given its popularity, and it was fun to try to view the work through a lens it may not have been intended for.
​
I hope you enjoyed this fun little exercise in diving into the mind of a fencing master and what they might consider important when prepping someone for a duel!