this is also why learning proper form and slowly building speed over time through technic is more important than trying to be the fastest straight way while sacrificely learning proper form
There is this thing about tempo that no one really talks about - it doesn't make sense in details. Why are we talking about time and then binding it into trajectory of motion in such weird ways, when there are easier ways to describe the whole thing? To understand that, you need to read Aristotle's Physics. Thing about the Aristotelian (and by extension anyone who was studying trivium and quadrivium, so all medieval and most renaissance) mechanics is that their framework of motion is absolutely fucking bonkers and dead wrong in several aspects - not surprising, because our mechanics are based on limits and vectors that were invented in 19th century. This means that when people like Agrippa or Thibault start to describe things in motion, they are using a completely different framework to the one we are familiar with from school. The greatest difference? In our modern mechanics, time and distance are what we call base units - we use them (and a few others) to derive all other things. Aristotle, on the other hand, doesn't have this notion of base units at all. His model of universe is more along the lines of object based programming, a set of things that have different properties. And time is solely a property of motion, up to a point where Aristotle makes an argument that no time can pass if there is no motion. (If you are wondering, how can we then have any time we agree on, well, Aristotle more or less says it is based on celestial motion so we can all observe it. This is all sorts of fucky and weird and needs niche explanations that our, much better, notion of time doesn't require.) So, if you are reading a fencing treatise that tries to make arguments based on Aristotelian view of the world, you really need to remember that SI time and Aristotelian time are two wildly different things - if you don't the details of the explanation will not make a lot of sense. Granted, if you are there just to do the techniques without worrying about the principles, you don't have to care about it, but still. (How tempo has evolved and is used in modern fencing terminology, i.e. more like a TTRPG action with several possible action lengths, is another discussion entirely)
Very good point, however - I think understanding the base concept of tempi and how they were used in the sources is still a topic that isn't widely understood in the HEMA-scene. And since this is a series about learning dall'Agocchie's way to use a sidesword, I needed to talk about his 5 tempi. However, the original video was too long, so I broke everything up and this is just a short primer of the 5 videos to come. Personally, I think one can use the historical terms and still apply our modern understanding of time... let's say *modernish* since time is indeed depending motion, just in a different way. (Yet, not at all relevant for the kind of velocities that we are moving in.) Tempi vary with the path of any specific motion, position, the strength and speed of the competitors and more, but we can still compare action lengths, timeframes of opportunities etc. The concept excels in teaching us that every motion that we take has a cost in time, how we can create good moments to strike and how to elongate them with technique / physical training etc. Last up, we can see remnants of how motion and time are linked in the way that we today measure years (earth rotation around sun), days (earth rotation around itself) etc. And I think a bit of leftovers from past terminology to remind us of an evolution of ways of thinking about the world is more cool than infuriating. (I'd probably not say the same thing about the naming conventions of coda lunga stretta / alta however :D)
@@SchildwachePotsdam It depends on what you want to do, really. If you are teaching or learning from someone, then there is no need to bring Aristotle into this - Aggochie has his 5 tempi (which are pretty damn similar in concept to DnD full-round, standard, swift and free actions) and that is enough for government work. Where it does trip you up is if you go to the original text and try to figure out what the hell they are saying in their overcomplicated way. (Well, it's overcomplicated to us who have been spoiled by Newtonian mechanics.) Where it usually comes up is in arguing some finer points of an interpretation where someone tries to use our modern SI unit time and then has to do some pretty tough mental gymnastics to make anything make sense. Funnily enough, as long as you are speaking in English the language barrier saves you in most casual discussion, because tempo is a different thing than time, and as long as everyone understands that you are fine.
Interesting. Does the length of the weapon effect tempo? Like if you were going against a guy with a sidesword while armed with a polearm ot vice-versa?
Thanks! And sure, since tempo and measure are closely linked, the latter will impact the former. Having more reach you still want to create tempi for you to strike them safely in. However, you have a bit more room for error as you can attack quite a bit earlier while they need to close the distance first.
Well, it's still way above average in views for my channel. So I guess the audience for these videos might be quite small after all. At least as long as I am not willing to invest way more time into editing etc.^^
I don't think we demonstrated a strike to the blade, did we? They were aimed at the opponent - however the distance of that action gave the opponent enough time to react and defend, to then counterattack. If the attacking tempo is really long or just very predictable the defender can also employ an action that defends and counterattack at the very same time, for example with a thrust (we find the terms contratempo or stesso tempo used for that in the sources). However, such actions are a bit harder to pull off as you will need to be really precise to actually catch or void the attacker's blade. We'll talk about it a bit in the next video of this series.
@@royalecrafts6252 it's an intro video for the tempo concept and lays the foundation of how to abuse mistakes of your opponent. Then in the final one we talk about approaching without giving away tempi and striking while still being safe.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Get early access, live online training sessions and support us to put out free content at www.patreon.com/SchildwachePotsdam - grazie mille! :)
Lessons on timing are so important.
this is also why learning proper form and slowly building speed over time through technic is more important than trying to be the fastest straight way while sacrificely learning proper form
What exactly from what has been said ("this") leads to that conclusion?
Good explanation of tempo! Thanks for the video
My pleasure, I am glad you liked it. The next videos will go more into the different ways to apply this knowledge. :)
It's about *time* you talked about tempo! ;) Thanks for sharing with us as always!
Haha, you got it! Thanks! :)
It’s like music isn’t it? Full time half time being in rhythm breaking the rhythm masters of different arts think alike I guess 🙆🏻♂️👍
Excellent stuff, thank you!
Thank you for your video! I love your friend's gear btw!💚
Thank you! Stephan is - as always - a very fancy fencer.
There is this thing about tempo that no one really talks about - it doesn't make sense in details. Why are we talking about time and then binding it into trajectory of motion in such weird ways, when there are easier ways to describe the whole thing? To understand that, you need to read Aristotle's Physics.
Thing about the Aristotelian (and by extension anyone who was studying trivium and quadrivium, so all medieval and most renaissance) mechanics is that their framework of motion is absolutely fucking bonkers and dead wrong in several aspects - not surprising, because our mechanics are based on limits and vectors that were invented in 19th century. This means that when people like Agrippa or Thibault start to describe things in motion, they are using a completely different framework to the one we are familiar with from school.
The greatest difference? In our modern mechanics, time and distance are what we call base units - we use them (and a few others) to derive all other things. Aristotle, on the other hand, doesn't have this notion of base units at all. His model of universe is more along the lines of object based programming, a set of things that have different properties. And time is solely a property of motion, up to a point where Aristotle makes an argument that no time can pass if there is no motion.
(If you are wondering, how can we then have any time we agree on, well, Aristotle more or less says it is based on celestial motion so we can all observe it. This is all sorts of fucky and weird and needs niche explanations that our, much better, notion of time doesn't require.)
So, if you are reading a fencing treatise that tries to make arguments based on Aristotelian view of the world, you really need to remember that SI time and Aristotelian time are two wildly different things - if you don't the details of the explanation will not make a lot of sense. Granted, if you are there just to do the techniques without worrying about the principles, you don't have to care about it, but still.
(How tempo has evolved and is used in modern fencing terminology, i.e. more like a TTRPG action with several possible action lengths, is another discussion entirely)
WOW. I'm not sure as a modern HEMA practitioner what difference it makes, but I'm dying to hear more.
Very good point, however - I think understanding the base concept of tempi and how they were used in the sources is still a topic that isn't widely understood in the HEMA-scene. And since this is a series about learning dall'Agocchie's way to use a sidesword, I needed to talk about his 5 tempi. However, the original video was too long, so I broke everything up and this is just a short primer of the 5 videos to come.
Personally, I think one can use the historical terms and still apply our modern understanding of time... let's say *modernish* since time is indeed depending motion, just in a different way. (Yet, not at all relevant for the kind of velocities that we are moving in.) Tempi vary with the path of any specific motion, position, the strength and speed of the competitors and more, but we can still compare action lengths, timeframes of opportunities etc. The concept excels in teaching us that every motion that we take has a cost in time, how we can create good moments to strike and how to elongate them with technique / physical training etc.
Last up, we can see remnants of how motion and time are linked in the way that we today measure years (earth rotation around sun), days (earth rotation around itself) etc. And I think a bit of leftovers from past terminology to remind us of an evolution of ways of thinking about the world is more cool than infuriating. (I'd probably not say the same thing about the naming conventions of coda lunga stretta / alta however :D)
@@SchildwachePotsdam It depends on what you want to do, really. If you are teaching or learning from someone, then there is no need to bring Aristotle into this - Aggochie has his 5 tempi (which are pretty damn similar in concept to DnD full-round, standard, swift and free actions) and that is enough for government work.
Where it does trip you up is if you go to the original text and try to figure out what the hell they are saying in their overcomplicated way. (Well, it's overcomplicated to us who have been spoiled by Newtonian mechanics.) Where it usually comes up is in arguing some finer points of an interpretation where someone tries to use our modern SI unit time and then has to do some pretty tough mental gymnastics to make anything make sense.
Funnily enough, as long as you are speaking in English the language barrier saves you in most casual discussion, because tempo is a different thing than time, and as long as everyone understands that you are fine.
oh my
Interesting. Does the length of the weapon effect tempo? Like if you were going against a guy with a sidesword while armed with a polearm ot vice-versa?
Thanks! And sure, since tempo and measure are closely linked, the latter will impact the former. Having more reach you still want to create tempi for you to strike them safely in. However, you have a bit more room for error as you can attack quite a bit earlier while they need to close the distance first.
500 views seems way less for delivery this suave???
Yt algorithm does it AGAIN
Well, it's still way above average in views for my channel. So I guess the audience for these videos might be quite small after all. At least as long as I am not willing to invest way more time into editing etc.^^
but why would you strike his blade in the first place?
I don't think we demonstrated a strike to the blade, did we? They were aimed at the opponent - however the distance of that action gave the opponent enough time to react and defend, to then counterattack. If the attacking tempo is really long or just very predictable the defender can also employ an action that defends and counterattack at the very same time, for example with a thrust (we find the terms contratempo or stesso tempo used for that in the sources). However, such actions are a bit harder to pull off as you will need to be really precise to actually catch or void the attacker's blade. We'll talk about it a bit in the next video of this series.
thanks for the explanation, but why give the opponent distance then? or why strike in a hold position and not a moving position?@@SchildwachePotsdam
@@royalecrafts6252 it's an intro video for the tempo concept and lays the foundation of how to abuse mistakes of your opponent. Then in the final one we talk about approaching without giving away tempi and striking while still being safe.
amazing man, I really liked the video btw, thanks for taking time to response as well@@SchildwachePotsdam