If I knew more about fencing I could have better followed Jeff's interesting points.
I think fencing with a long blade and what we commonly call fighting with a knife, or short blade, have much more relevance to each other than normally assumed.
After posting my comment/question about the S guard, I remembered a thread on another forum regarding the detent in the spine just in front of the guard of a Randall #1 All-Purpose Fighter.
In the Randall #1 thread, several people said Randall intended the detent as a place for the index finger when holding the knife with the major edge up and the clip down.
Along these lines, significant evidence exists to suggest Jim Bowie held his knife in this manner, major edge up and clip down.
In the case of the F-S Pattern 1, given the tablet or unsharpened ricasso, a person could hold the knife with the forward portion of the S guard between his index and middle finger.
The rearward curving portion of the S guard would absolutely guarantee the hand could not slide forward on the blade, regardless of the force of the blow/thrust.
The index finger in front of the S guard, in conjunction with the unsharpened tablet/ricasso would enable a much more powerful forehand and backhand slash, as well as guaranteeing blade retention in a draw cut.
So, rather than a paintbrush grip, I see this knife held in a hammer pinch grip, with the thumb on a bias to the tablet, rather than flat to it, and the index finger hooked around the S guard.
Fairbairn once remarked that he designed the grip to come to hand naturally, especially when acquired in an emergency.
The Pattern 1 configuration would guarantee a usable paintbrush grip no matter how quickly one acquired the knife; and, if time permitted even a half-second of adjustment, then the configuration would favor a natural and extraordinarily powerful and secure hammer pinch grip with the index finger around the guard.
Please notice also the acuteness of point on Peter's Pattern 1 knife.
This blade has almost straight edges all the way to the point, and starts out with .25" thickness.
This makes for a very light and quick point with a thick edge geometry almost all the way to the point.
In order to slash with this knife, one could not rely on any tip momentum in order to effect the type of whipping, or chopping action one would expect with a Randall #1.
Rather, one would need to put some muscle into a slash with the F-S Pattern 1, and the hammer pinch grip with the index finger in front of the S guard would make this very doable in both forehand and backhand slashing.
This knife has begun to make enormous sense to me.
I would like to handle it with both the 2" S guard and the 3" S guard to see how that small of a difference affects the handling of the knife.
Fairbairn, Sykes and later Applegate said the quickness of a knife mattered more than the size, and that a man with a small quick knife would defeat a man with a larger blade every time.
I can see how the design may have multiplied the size of the F-S Fighting Knife Pattern 1 while at the same time preserving or even improving its natural quickness.
I wonder if I have projected more into the design than Fairbairn and Sykes intended, or whether I have actually rediscovered the intent of their design.
-----
edited for typo and to add link to Pattern 1 F-S Fighting Knife
http://www.nzknives.co.nz/pattern1.htm
I think fencing with a long blade and what we commonly call fighting with a knife, or short blade, have much more relevance to each other than normally assumed.
After posting my comment/question about the S guard, I remembered a thread on another forum regarding the detent in the spine just in front of the guard of a Randall #1 All-Purpose Fighter.
In the Randall #1 thread, several people said Randall intended the detent as a place for the index finger when holding the knife with the major edge up and the clip down.
Along these lines, significant evidence exists to suggest Jim Bowie held his knife in this manner, major edge up and clip down.
In the case of the F-S Pattern 1, given the tablet or unsharpened ricasso, a person could hold the knife with the forward portion of the S guard between his index and middle finger.
The rearward curving portion of the S guard would absolutely guarantee the hand could not slide forward on the blade, regardless of the force of the blow/thrust.
The index finger in front of the S guard, in conjunction with the unsharpened tablet/ricasso would enable a much more powerful forehand and backhand slash, as well as guaranteeing blade retention in a draw cut.
So, rather than a paintbrush grip, I see this knife held in a hammer pinch grip, with the thumb on a bias to the tablet, rather than flat to it, and the index finger hooked around the S guard.
Fairbairn once remarked that he designed the grip to come to hand naturally, especially when acquired in an emergency.
The Pattern 1 configuration would guarantee a usable paintbrush grip no matter how quickly one acquired the knife; and, if time permitted even a half-second of adjustment, then the configuration would favor a natural and extraordinarily powerful and secure hammer pinch grip with the index finger around the guard.
Please notice also the acuteness of point on Peter's Pattern 1 knife.
This blade has almost straight edges all the way to the point, and starts out with .25" thickness.
This makes for a very light and quick point with a thick edge geometry almost all the way to the point.
In order to slash with this knife, one could not rely on any tip momentum in order to effect the type of whipping, or chopping action one would expect with a Randall #1.
Rather, one would need to put some muscle into a slash with the F-S Pattern 1, and the hammer pinch grip with the index finger in front of the S guard would make this very doable in both forehand and backhand slashing.
This knife has begun to make enormous sense to me.
I would like to handle it with both the 2" S guard and the 3" S guard to see how that small of a difference affects the handling of the knife.
Fairbairn, Sykes and later Applegate said the quickness of a knife mattered more than the size, and that a man with a small quick knife would defeat a man with a larger blade every time.
I can see how the design may have multiplied the size of the F-S Fighting Knife Pattern 1 while at the same time preserving or even improving its natural quickness.
I wonder if I have projected more into the design than Fairbairn and Sykes intended, or whether I have actually rediscovered the intent of their design.
-----
edited for typo and to add link to Pattern 1 F-S Fighting Knife
http://www.nzknives.co.nz/pattern1.htm
