The HEMA hierarchy of control

The hierarchy of control is - as I've been informed by a professor who has been involved in safety research for the last 35+ years - one of the few safety models that has actually, demonstrably, improved safety.

In short, it simply states that actions taken to control risk are more effective at the top of the hierarchy than those at the bottom. It doesn't mean that actions should not be taken at the bottom of the hierarchy, just that those at the top should be considered first and will, generally, be more effective at reducing risk. However, actions at the top are generally harder to take, so not always practical. Measures taken lower down control the residual risk that has not been (or cannot be) managed by the layers above.

The HEMA hierarchy of control with examples

Let's see how this can be applied to HEMA....

Firstly, lets define the hazard we are trying to control. Fencing, a hazardous activity. Its main risks are cuts, bruises, concussions, stabs, broken bones, etc. Ignoring the risks from the person, e.g. grappling, the main hazard we are trying to control in this article is the sword itself, and the risks can be summarised as blunt force trauma from cuts and penetrating injuries from thrusts.

Eliminate

Can the hazard be removed entirely? Yes! We can simply not fence today. This isn't a permanent solution (assuming we ever want to fence again), but there will be situations when simply not fencing will be an option:

• You or your training partner don't have the right gear.

• You are not in the right state of mind, maybe you are angry or tired.

• You have an existing injury.

We could also not use a sword when we train. There are plenty of drills that can be done with bare hands, such as footwork and distance drills.

However, generally, we can't entirely eliminate the hazard if we want to fence with swords.

Practical things you can do*:

• Don't fence today (for whatever reason)

• Don't use a sword today, do footwork drills or something non-weapon-based

*Note that throughout these are examples of how risk can be reduced, it won't be practical to do them all, or all the time

Replace or reduce

Can we reduce exposure to the hazard? Yes, we can fence less often or for shorter periods. Or we can use our more dangerous swords less frequently and do more training with something safer.

Can we swap out the hazard for something less hazardous? We have already done this to a large extent, as we fence with training weapons rather than sharps. But we could also swap from one discipline to another, e.g., from longsword to sabre or sidesword, or to rapier, or to smallsword. This swaps one risk for another (e.g. the risk of broken bones for penetrative injury), which (together with other risk controls) might lower the overall risk. Or it might allow us to lose some other risk controls (by wearing less PPE, for example) while keeping the overall level of risk low.

Practical things you can do:

• Consider changing discipline to a lighter weapon (I've largely moved from longsword to rapier to smallsword, with increasing joy each time)

• Fence less often, or use riskier weapons less often (at the risk of becoming out of practice, though)

Engineering

Engineering controls try to control the hazard, or separate the hazard from the person, with design. These can be implemented by the manufacturers or modifications to existing equipment. Since the sword is the key hazard we are considering in this article, this means modifications to the sword itself. In HEMA this basically comes down to a combination of:

• Lighter blades

• Thicker edges

• Large, rounded tips

• More flexible blades

• Larger and more protective hand guards

• Different materials

However, engineered solutions are trade offs, and they won't always be practical or desirable. Too light a blade changes the nature of the fencing, as does the level of hand protection. Sometimes it swaps one risk for another: e.g. foam boffers won't break bones, but they may encourage people to hit harder, risking concussions.

At some point we reach a limit of what we can do with engineering (or perhaps more accurately what we are willing to accept), and our choices are often dependent on what swords we are fencing against and what ruleset we are competing under.

Practical things you can do:

• Within the realm of your chosen discipline, opt for lighter, more flexible, or better quality blades

• Go for the option with more hand protection, not the one that looks nicest (that swept hilt looks nice, but the cup hilt will massively reduce the chances of hand injury)

• Get a blade that has a large inbuilt safety tip (spatulated or rolled), not a simple rounded tip

• if needed, add an additional safety tip, ideally plastic or leather or something not likely to stick to a fencing mask

• Consider using a foam sword instead of steel or synthetic, a single stick instead of a sabre, a dueling sabre instead of an infantry sabre, etc. - at least some of the time.

Administrative controls

These are behavioural controls. They are the rules and procedures by which we carry out the hazardous activity and use the equipment. Most controls are administrative in most activities we do. For example, when driving a car there are many engineering controls, from brakes to seat belts to suspension systems etc. which rarely fail, but since a car (like a sword) requires a human operator, our daily experience is that safety is almost entirely assured through administrative controls. For example, consider the training and testing needed to learn how to drive, the rules of the road we follow, etc.

The same is true with fencing. We need training to learn how to defend ourselves, but just as importantly to learn how to safely attack our training partner in a way that doesn't injure them. It is about the intensity with which we strike or thrust, and to what parts of the body. It is about the techniques we choose to use and - perhaps more importantly - those we choose not to. It's also about the little things, like how we carry our sword when not in use to avoid injury to others.

Administrative controls are often considered to be the most important risk controls in HEMA, and in martial arts in general; simply because it is such as human-centric activity there is a limit on what our other risk controls will allow us to do. When your chosen activity is to simulate the application of deadly force to an unwilling opponent, we have to place limits in what we allow people to do.

To an extent, these administrative controls will depend on our goals and on the level of protection we have gained from our other risk controls. If you are using a steel longsword with minimal gear then you limit your activity to controlled drills. If you have a foam sword or more PPE (see below) then you adjust accordingly.

Practical things you can do:

• Learn to defend yourself

• Learn how to hit (or not hit) in a way that doesn't cause injury

• Gain a good understanding of the risks, of what is and isn't allowed based on you and your training partner's equipment

• Set rules limiting intensity and target areas

• Learn to 'look after' your training partner - the blow not delivered is the safest one to make

PPE

There are 5 main aspects to personal protective equipment (PPE):

• Skin covering - to protect against burs on the blade cutting the skin

• Padding - the reduce blunt force trauma from cuts or thrusts

• Hard plating - the reduce blunt force trauma from cuts or thrusts, most notably to protect joints and bones, to the neck etc.

• Newton rating - to protect against penetrative injuries from thrusts

• Mesh - to protect the face

It is important that we at least try to think of PPE as a last line of defence. In an ideal world, PPE would be entirely unnecessary if we have sufficiently controlled or eliminated the hazards. We only wear PPE because residual risk remains, because:

• There are limits to the engineering controls we will accept - we want our swords to retain a certain weight or rigidity

• Certain risks remain that can't be controlled by other means, e.g. the eyes will remain vulnerable regardless of the type of sword

• We don't fully trust the engineering or administrative controls - you might thrust me in the face accidentally, or that blade may break and become sharp, or you may hit me too hard

  
  

While PPE allows us to do things that would otherwise we too dangerous to do - such as cutting at the hand, thrusting at the face - PPE should not be used as an excuse to abandon our administrative controls and fence recklessly and without consideration for our training partner's welfare. In other words, your fencing jacket is designed to protect you against accidents like broken blades; it's not designed so you can fence with sharp swords.

PPE is one of the biggest trade-offs in HEMA. As a general rule, the more protective your PPE is, the harder it will be to fence. Those bulky gloves are necessary for longsword but they may be slow and heavy or prevent you from using certain guards or techniques. That 800N jacket should stop a thrust from a broken blade but may be hotter and heavier. When we use lighter blades or place other limits on our fencing (intensity, target validity, etc.), then we can reduce or wear different PPE, however if we don't properly understand what our PPE is and isn't capable of, we can also gain a false sense of security.

Don't forget the human factor: if PPE interferes with what you are trying to do - i.e. if it prevents you from fencing properly - then you will become tempted not to wear it. Make sure your PPE fits and is comfortable.

Practical things you can do:

• Gain an understanding of what your PPE is capable of, particularly the difference between 350N and 800N

• Make sure your PPE is suitable for your discipline, level of intensity, etc.

• Get an 800N layer on your torso, either by opting for an 800N jacket or getting an 800N under-plastron

• Opt for 1600N masks instead of 350N

• Try PPE before you buy, if possible, and try to make sure your PPE is comfortable and doesn't limit your mobility more than it needs to

  
  

Discipline

Discipline is sometimes added as a final level on the hierarchy of control. This is about monitoring that the controls and rules we have in place are being implemented and are effective. This comes down to checking that people are wearing the right PPE, swords are tipped, people are not fencing too hard or aggressively, that people are in a good state of mind and not fencing while angry, etc. This doesn't have to be done by a club coach, it can be done by your training partner, or even yourself.

By itself, discipline is not effective at managing risk. It is all about enforcement of the above risk controls.

• Am I having a bad day? Perhaps I shouldn't fence today, or maybe I should focus on footwork (Eliminate)

• Maybe I should limit how much I do today, or maybe I should practice single stick today instead of longsword (Replace or reduce)

• Has my training partner got a safety tip on their sword? Hmm, I don't like the look of that reenactment longsword, they should be using a federschwert (Engineering)

• Guys, tone down the aggression. Let's go 50% intensity today (Administration)

• What PPE is my training partner wearing? Do they have a gorget? A plastron? (PPE)

Practical things you can do:

• Check your training partner's PPE before fencing

• Inspect your training partner's sword

• Inspect and maintain your own swords, replacing safety tips etc. as needed

• Inspect your own PPE, maintaining it as needed

• Be wary of behaviour in yourself or others that seems unusual; watch for aggressive behaviour etc.

Conclusion

HEMA is already doing all of the things in this article, at least to an extent. No, that doesn't mean that everyone has thrown away their federschwerts in favour of actual feathers... It means that by and large clubs have learned to manage the risk to the point where injuries are fairly rare. They do so by selecting appropriate measures to take from each level of the hierarchy (even if they don't realise they are using the hierarchy). Much of this has been learned over the last 20 years through trial and error or by learning from modern fencing. Individuals are also able to temper their activities based on the level of risk they are willing to accept. The sport is relatively safe, although there have been a few high-profile incidents of rapiers thrusting through 350N jackets.

Unfortunately, we don't have a way to quantify the risk. Our everyday experience tells us that 'everything is fine', but when it comes to preventing those rare, potentially life changing/ending injuries, a few additional steps could be taken that would be proportionate and not overly disruptive:

• (Engineering) Using lighter more flexible blades, if possible

• (Engineering) Better tipping of blades

• (PPE) Use of 800N PPE on the torso, ideally jacket and/or some sort of under-plastron. There is resistance to this due to cost and availability, but currently HEMA practitioners typically use far less penetration protection than modern fencing does, and that is a problem

Ask yourself: what is your club doing to manage risk? If you have safety concerns, is there anything more that could be done, particularly higher up the hierarchy?