In swordplay:
It seems to me that the best defense to a thrust is a "cut" because the arc of a "cut" can quickly and more surely engage the vector of a "thrust". With a bladed weapon like a dagger or sword(or even the hand), it is the point that forms the initial largest and fastest arc with points along the length of the blade creating consistent (though slower and smaller) concentric arcs to the point of pivot or radius. To defend a thrust one of these arcs must intersect and often only slightly deflect the vector of the thrust. Not much mass is required, advantage going to the arc.

This statement originally describing off hand parries has evolved into a discussion of how to describe actions as taught or seen in writing.  I have terrible memory for Italian or French terminology so I translate it into geometry and physics or simplified movements--

Regarding the blade, I  choose to describe the point as if it is a single geometric point. In geometry, a moving point through space creates a line.

I describe the blade(the part of the sword not the point) as if it is a line segment. If you move a line segment in a single direction you get a plane. Rotation of the line around a point or other line creates a solid, often a cone. 

All actions of the point  that move as to intersect the a target plane at a single point are thrusts along the line of force. Any action of the line segment that is not purely linear on its axis is a cut through space.

or

In a thrust the point's line of force intersects at only one point.  A cut is a plane of force created by a blade that moves to cross another plane or line. In a cut, multiple points along the plane of force move as to contact it's target plane or line.

Thus describing:


C cuts cross-body with dagger to deflect D's thrust to the upper torso and in same time thrusts to D with sword, or else cuts C's arm.. Geometrically C with dagger cuts cross plane to intersect the line of D's thrust in same time with sword line thrust to D's head or else cuts plane cross D's arm.


D  thrusts with hand to control C's arm combined with sword thrust to C's head. Geometrically- D thrusts hand grab cross line to oppose C's sword line in same time D thrusts sword line to D's Head.

or more difficult to gather how we arrive at the final pose:


D thrusts to C's head in same time cutting against C's thrust to move C's blade offline. Geometrically D thrusts point to C's head cutting cross blade in plane sufficient to deflect C's line of thrust.


However When described in terms as below which is which?:

"By way of clarification of the following figures, I say that D having the figure marked C
stringered on the inside, the same C disengages in order to give a thrust to the chest of
figure D. D strikes him with a thrust in the left eye with a fixed foot or an increase of
pace as the figure shows. But yet I say that if C had been a shrewd person, when he
disengaged he would have disengaged by way of a feint, with his body somewhat held
back, and D approaching confidently in order to attack C, C would have parried the
enemy's sword to the outside with the false or the true edge, giving him a mandritto to the
face or an imbroccata to the chest, and in such a conclusion would retire into a low
quarta."

"Figure D having gained the sword on the inside of the figure marked as C, the same C
disengages to give a stocatta to the face of D. D strikes him in the face in seconda with a
passata, giving a grip with the left hand to the hilt of the enemy's sword. I will never fail
to say that if C had been a shrewd person, he would have disengaged the sword as a feint
with his body held back somewhat to the rear, and D approaching confidently to pass, C
falsing underneath the enemy’s sword and turning an inquartata with a void of the body,
passing his leg crossed behind, would strike him in the chest."

"Lying in a low or high terza, with your dagger at your wrist, your adversary being in
whatsoever guard convenient to stringer on the outside, you will begin to stringer on the
outside in high or low terza, according to the occasion, elevating your dagger, and he
wanting to disengage to the inside, and throw in quarta or seconda, you, parrying down
with the dagger under your sword arm, will throw at him a stramazzone to his arm or you
will strike him in seconda in the face, as is shown."

Although I do not doubt the translation's accuracy-- and not to disparage the translators nor the fencers that enjoy or prefer to talk in this manner-- how am I to explain or teach this technique to a new fighter who just wants to fight better?

School ended...  My unfettered access to a wheel and kiln is on hiatus 'til the fall unless I find something/somewhere else.  I got a couple of new things done this week.  I've been looking at Siegburg stoneware in the Museum of London.    I 'm toying with the idea of 50 for the SCA 50th.  Maybe 50 different copies from each region represented... 

I've just made three, one influenced by this and this with this thrown in for good measure.  And one influenced by this and another by this. 

My work at approximating the look of these wares by application of electric kiln fired glazes is progressing well too. For those familiar with pottery, I'm using Amaco potters choice temmoku, shino and oil spot over a locally made burnt orange glaze.  I'm using a process of brushing on and sponging off glazes... While they're not too colorful, they are looking more authentic...

Nothing like putting your hands on that
soft silky smooth white body...

So easily wet with the slightest touch...
so quickly dry again...

responsive to the slightest touch...
loves a firm steady hand...
But,
get too abrupt or impatient and you've
got a writhing ripping and sometimes sticky
mess on your hands...

literally...

Nothing throws like porcelain...
it centers easily, is very plastic,
and throws well with little water.

Beginners usually over wet it and it turns
to goo... or
let it dry too much and it tears and
crumbles...

Me, I just love that tacit conversation
with it at the wheel....

Thixotropic...