# The Influence of Spanish Renaissance Swordsmanship on Filipino Martial Arts?



## The Game (May 5, 2006)

In digging around online, I found a link to this article. An interesting read which seems to make some sound conclusions on the amount of outside influence on the FMA. Of course, being rather clueless, I have to ask for others opinions on this bit. 



> The Influence of Spanish Renaissance Swordsmanship on Filipino Martial Arts?
> 
> by John Clements
> 
> Although it is not often recognized or acknowledged, the various Filipino martial arts such as Escrima/Arnis are said to contain many elements of Spanish Renaissance swordsmanship. Frequently, when this is acknowledged, it is often done in a misconceived manner that apparently allows followers of modern Filipino weapon arts to dismiss this influence as either inconsequential or even irrelevant. If there is influence from Spanish Renaissance swordsmanship, it would likely be from methods of  military cut & thrust swords, not the style of civilian thrusting rapiers.  Just what these technqiues might be, and how they are known to be 16th century Spanish in origin (and not something introduced from 19th century epee fencing) would certainly be interesting for today's student of Reniassance martil arts to discover.


Rest is at : http://www.thearma.org/essays/influence.htm


----------



## Jonathan Randall (May 5, 2006)

Well, given that the Phillipines were occupied by the Spanish and their ports (often rough areas) had many Spanish sailors and officers, likely armed with bladed weapons, it seems to me to be a no-brainer that some influence is there. How much? I don't have a clue. Good question, though.


----------



## RoninPimp (May 5, 2006)

Good article. I think it comes down to speculation. But it does make sense since the Spanish were there so long. And Spanish fencing from that time period was so well renowned.


----------



## Rich Parsons (May 5, 2006)

The Question to ask is why would Spanish Fencing NOT have influenced FMA's?

This is from the Phillipine Islands where there were many people who went over the fight and conquer or trade. This is where the Tribes and cultures within the PI also faught each other. Many of the arts would study what others had to learn how to counter these moves. To make sure that nothing new or somethign old had not been forgotten. 

I understand pride in one's culture. Yet to study ones' enemy to make oneself a better fighter is a respectable trait. 

I see no dishonor nor reason to deny any influence, no matter how small it might have been. 

Now I can see arguements on how much Spanish swords systems may have effected a particular art or system versus another art or system.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 5, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> I see no dishonor nor reason to deny any influence, no matter how small it might have been.



Same as the Japanese not liking to admit karate is largely Chuan Fa Based, or the Korean's that TKD was essentially Shotokan.

Occupying force moves out, you want to bring back some national pride, you need things that are of your own culture, not leftovers from a time you want to move away from.


----------



## Rich Parsons (May 5, 2006)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> Same as the Japanese not liking to admit karate is largely Chuan Fa Based, or the Korean's that TKD was essentially Shotokan.
> 
> Occupying force moves out, you want to bring back some national pride, you need things that are of your own culture, not leftovers from a time you want to move away from.


 
So if you deny your past and your history, then are you doomed to repeat it.?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 5, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> So if you deny your past and your history, then are you doomed to repeat it.?


Kinda the way I see it.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 5, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> So if you deny your past and your history, then are you doomed to repeat it.?



Never said it was right, just that it happens


----------



## Stan (May 5, 2006)

From a Western perspective, I think the cultural issues going on here are complex.  On the surface, it would seem that for Filipinos to deny or downplay the influence of Spanish martial arts on FMA is a matter of national pride, and for Western FMA practitioners to do the same is simply being respectful of Filipino culture.

However, within a Western context, this denial might not be a progressive sign of multiculturalism or respect, but a manifestation of "Orientalist" cultural stereotyping that since the mid-20th-century has seen Asian martial arts as superhumanly effective in a mystical way.  How often do we hear it ignorantly repeated that China (or India) is "the birthplace of the Martial Arts", as if African and European cultures had not native fighting styles.  How often do people assume that Savate must have come from Asian influence on French sailors, as Europeans could not possibly have developed high kicks.  

How many American martial arts schools generically use the terms "dojo" "sensei" or  "kata" whether or not the arts they teach are Japanese?

I believe strongly in Filipinos maintaining their cultural pride.  Regardless of whether there is Spanish influence in FMA, they obviously are a unique cultural product of the people of the Philipines, and not just a version of Spanish techniques.  I worry more about Westerners believing that for Martial Arts to be effective, they must be Asian.  Such stereotyped seeming praise can be just as racist on the part of white Westerners as it would be for them to laud the supposed natural athletic or sexual prowess of people of African descent.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (May 6, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> The Question to ask is why would Spanish Fencing NOT have influenced FMA's?


 
That about sums it up, I believe. :asian: 

I think that it would be interesting to see experts in both Spanish arts and FMA's, non-politically, compare notes. Perhaps in nuances that a layperson such as myself would miss, they would find correlations in some techniques.


----------



## lhommedieu (May 6, 2006)

I think that also the issue is necessarily clouded becaude most FMA's that concentrate on blade technique typically offer a blend of stick training and blade training because stick training is intended to be a "bridge" to the blade training.  Why a "bridge"?  Because training with sticks is cheaper and safer and might possibly allow the teacher to weed out students for whom blade training is deemed inappropriate.  But since most students typically see a lot more stick than blade (at least initially) the opportunity to compare FMA sword to European sword is not as strong as it might be if one just learned bladed weapons.

There are generally two approaches to teaching both stick and blade:  (1) teach the stick as if is was a blade so that the transition from stick to blade goes smoothly; (2) teach both weapons but teach the stick first and then the blade.  In both cases it's important to pay careful attention to the differences between weapon-types.  

One of the dangers of the first approach is that you may learn how to use "a stick as if it were a sword" but fail to learn how to hit adequately with a stick qua stick.  For example, it's common to see students practice hitting with the middle of the stick and "cut through" fleshy parts of their partner's body with their stick (as if it were sword)  But they also need to be taught that using the stick qua stick involves hitting bony targets with the end of the stick to take advantage of the leverage and weight that this tool provides.  All you are doing when you "cut through" a fleshy target is spending more time off-task (it takes more time to "cut through" and reposition for the next strike) and besides, _you can't cut with a stick_.  Better to concentrate on power generation and targeting with a stick and then learn to tighten up the movements when you transition to a sword.  I would argue that it is in the work of "tightening up" one's sword movements that one is better able to see a _possible _connection to European sword.

I have one teacher who teaches the stick as if it were a sword with the above caveats in place and I think that this method works just fine.  In addition, this teacher has excellent sword technique.  In fact, now that I'm spending more time practicing with blades I grateful for the discipline that his constant stress on corrections has instilled in me.  Another friend of mine came to FMA's with a strong background in Western sabre and would always impress me with his ability to maintain range with a stick though the use of timing and footwork - I don't think that he ever considered the stick a "stick" as much as a new tool to practice his swordwork through an FMA modality.  But - and this is an important "but" - this guy also has excellent stick technique insofar as he can hit hard with the least effort and can hit anything he chooses.

Click here for some examples of different blade drills that are usually done with wooden stick and dagger first.  Our premise here is that different weapon types lead to different types of techniques and that weapons that might be appropriate in one FMA may not be as appropriate in another FMA.  We've chosen to use rapier and dagger for a couple of the drills merely to inhance the argument that long range weapons involve long range techniques.  Another point to make however (and here I think that there is a valid answer to those who question the influence of European sword on Filipino martial arts) that in _some_ cases Filipinos took note of the extreme range of say, a Spanish or Italian rapier-sword, and fashioned an appropriate response with say, a pinute or espada type weapon.  But (to return to my earlier point) since a lot of the drills and exercises are done with a stick - the connection is far less obvious than it could be.

The extent to which stick technique reflects a European sword  influence is certainly debatable.  I would venture to say that about 10% of the drills and exercises in the curriculum of the San Miguel Eskrima that I practice involve an obvious _response_ to European sword - and that these drills and exercises, while initially introduced as stick drills, work much better if practiced with a sword.  Most FMA's in my opinion are however influenced to a lesser degree or just not at all.   It's interesting to note however that a Pekiti Tirsia Kali espada y daga techique that I learned recently is _exactly the same_ as a Spanish sabre technique that I saw demonstrated at a seminar taught last year.  I don't think that this is an example of "parallel development'; I think it is an example on a Filipino thinking, "Ah - so _that's _how I can beat him."

Best,

Steve Lamade


----------



## Rich Parsons (May 6, 2006)

Stan said:
			
		

> From a Western perspective, I think the cultural issues going on here are complex. On the surface, it would seem that for Filipinos to deny or downplay the influence of Spanish martial arts on FMA is a matter of national pride, and for Western FMA practitioners to do the same is simply being respectful of Filipino culture.
> 
> However, within a Western context, this denial might not be a progressive sign of multiculturalism or respect, but a manifestation of "Orientalist" cultural stereotyping that since the mid-20th-century has seen Asian martial arts as superhumanly effective in a mystical way. How often do we hear it ignorantly repeated that China (or India) is "the birthplace of the Martial Arts", as if African and European cultures had not native fighting styles. How often do people assume that Savate must have come from Asian influence on French sailors, as Europeans could not possibly have developed high kicks.
> 
> ...




Stan,

Thank you for your comments.

I never said that the PI and the Filipino Culture was a direct reflection of the Spanish. This is obivous even to the Lump of coal (* Myself *) who has never been there. Just open a book and or talk to anyone who has been there or is from there. 

There are many and I mean many Islands, multiple languages, with an excepted language for teaching, but still local languages survive and thrive. 

There are multiple religions, including local and also Islam not just Catholism form the Spanish. 

A very unique place and lots of history. 

My comments maybe be better explained with this example:

During the American Revolution (* Called the revolt of the colonies or uprising of the colonies by the English *), the French provided assistance to the budding Confederacy that were the 13 colonies. 

So, no matter how much one dislikes how the French have gone into places through the late 19th and most of the 20th centuries that the USA went into afterwords and was in combat. So if one was to say they disliked the French for this (* Hypothetically *), and then to turn around and deny the contact with the French during the 18th Century and the help they provided, would be to deny the truth, and deny the history that helped make the Republic of the United States of America. 

I am not trying to be insulting. 

I am trying to approach this issue with an open mind, an understanding of history, and looking for possible theories or ideas. Even though I present my point as fait de complait, it was meant to continue the discussin and also to  possible ahve a few people think or look at this question that has been around for as long as I know, from a different point of view.


----------



## Rich Parsons (May 6, 2006)

lhommedieu said:
			
		

> I think that also the issue is necessarily clouded becaude most FMA's that concentrate on blade technique typically offer a blend of stick training and blade training because stick training is intended to be a "bridge" to the blade training. Why a "bridge"? Because training with sticks is cheaper and safer and might possibly allow the teacher to weed out students for whom blade training is deemed inappropriate. But since most students typically see a lot more stick than blade (at least initially) the opportunity to compare FMA sword to European sword is not as strong as it might be if one just learned bladed weapons.
> 
> There are generally two approaches to teaching both stick and blade: (1) teach the stick as if is was a blade so that the transition from stick to blade goes smoothly; (2) teach both weapons but teach the stick first and then the blade. In both cases it's important to pay careful attention to the differences between weapon-types.
> 
> ...




Thanks Steve,

Good Points to discuss and consider.


----------

