Hi RC
1. My apologies Rick, but this is not about swords but communication.
2. On the subject of the Spanish School
My Post 83:
But I agree that there are no surviving traditions of old Spanish fencing, save with the later small sword/epee, which in any event were adaptations of the French school, with Hispanic touches added.
My Post 85:
I don't think that you read my post fully. But any kind? That's rather broad isn't it?...
My Post 92:
The late Spanish schools, which I understand are still practiced under the rubric of "classical" fencing, were certainly a rehash of the French school, but had a local flavour, as exemplified by their hilts, and the attendant grip, much in the manner of the Italian school.
Your Post 94:
Indeed, but this does not change the fact that it was the French method that was being taught
Comments: If you don't mind me saying so, on this issue, you are attempting to convert the converted. Can't you see that I am agreeing with you?
What do I have have to do to get across what I made amply clear in my posts 83 and 92, namely that the late Spanish schools were an adaptation of the French school? I pointed out in my post 85 that you did not read me fully - But Robert is probably right, the fault must be with my writing.
3. On Sparing:
My words:
But not close enough with knives, which are heavily dependent on factors other than technique, at least not in my opinion.
Your reply:
Not in your opinion, then.
Comments: No sarcasm is intended but you are needlessly repeating me because I already stated: "... not in my opinion."
4. On Sword Alone:
My words:
I thought that I covered that by stating that all fencing treatises had to allow for the possibility that a sword may have to be used alone.
Your words:
It was more than just a "possibility"--it was the norm for pikemen and the like
Comments: `More' than a `possibility' does not make logical sense. Within the group of all possible ways of using a sword there is the sub-group of swords being used alone. The pikemen and all others who used a sword alone belong to this subset - Those who used a sword in combination with a parrying implement belong to the rest of the overall grouping.
What you are in effect saying is that
those who used a sword alone, used it alone. I have no problem with that. But why say it?
5. Off Topic: Rick is right. We got OT and we should continue this privately. I am happy to oblige, but let's get our communication right.
I will soon reply to your other points, sometime towards next week because here we have a public holiday coming up. It will be by way of a private message to conform with the rules of this forum. Some of the points that you raised are really interesting and worth further discussing.
6. My Background:
Just a simple collector and an incurable aficionado de armas blancas, that is, an enthusiast of swords and daggers. Like Don Quijote I spend my old age musing about olden times and tilting with windmills every now and then

. Perhaps being a metallurgist has given me a keener appreciation of what old weaponry was all about.
Cheers
Chris