ARMA Demo on some of the common problems with how "sword-fighting" has been represented in movies and other sword stunt shows.
Last edited by a moderator:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ARMA Demo on some of the common problems with how "sword-fighting" has been represented in movies and other sword stunt shows.
Good videos, but why does he keep saying, "this is what our historical sources tell us"?
I really don't consider the SCA an authority or a place to actually train in weapons. No offense to anyone in the SCA, but what I have seen of SCA fighting has definitely underwhelmed me.Because there are dozens (hundreds?) of surviving period sources on combat of this nature. People interested in medieval and renaissance combat techniques can't often find genuine authorities. You can get training in some places from groups like ARMA and the SCA, but the quality of that training is erratic.
That goes without saying.Serious students tend to find historical sources as well, just as they do for other martial arts.
Outside of Olympic fencing and historical fencing with the same three weapons, no.Aye, Dan, the WSA are reconstructions from the sources as there has been no living tradition carried forward through the centuries as there has been with the JSA.
I really don't consider the SCA an authority or a place to actually train in weapons. No offense to anyone in the SCA, but what I have seen of SCA fighting has definitely underwhelmed me.
Modern sport fencing is only one derivation away from it's original intention as a training method for real "in anger" usage. I know of at least 5 Maestros teaching historic Dueling methods who believe that Foil teaches important foundational skills and 2 of them insist on serious students learning Foil as a prerequisite. Thus, I'd opine that it bears more than a little relation.Of one thing you can be sure, modern sport fencing bears no relation to how the weapons were truly used 'in anger'. A good analogy is the farcical touch sparring you get in some unarmed arts.
That depends on whether or not you include some Rapier styles and a number of Military Saber styles (including English, Russian, and Polish) as part of the Olympic 3-Weapon (I don't).Outside of Olympic fencing and historical fencing with the same three weapons, no.
That depends on whether or not you include some Rapier styles and a number of Military Saber styles (including English, Russian, and Polish) as part of the Olympic 3-Weapon (I don't).
In the sense of tracing it to a single founder, it would count.And then there's the question of what counts as a "Lineage" in the Longsword tradition. There were some Classical Fencers in the Victorian era (Hutton and Castle come to mind) who revived Longsword from sources and then taught that to their students going forward. Does that count as a Lineage?
And then we can muddy up the waters even more by adding Jogo du Pau (two-handed long stick), some styles of which claim their origin, and therefore lineage, hails from knightly Longsword and Spear (the two weapons were closely intertwined).
Without sounding flippant, this is exactly the sort of thing that induces howls of derision and cries of, 'you can't learn from a book.'But, yes, most of European Longsword being taught today is developed from historic texts & similar sources starting no earlier than the last quarter of the 20th Century.
Nor do I. Have these weapons been taught continuously or were they restored/revived?
The Military Sabre traditions have and there is clear recorded evidence. The Rapier might have but it is unclear. The same schools have been teaching and teachers back up-line taught it to mid-line students but it's not clear if those mid-line students specifically taught rapier or some derivation of it. As Langenschwert says, teachers at both the front and the back have been teaching but we're unsure of the middle and Epee was specifically intended as a training mechanism.Nor do I. Have these weapons been taught continuously or were they restored/revived?
Neither did most Europeans. You recorded who your teacher was if he was somebody famous and you could cash it a little bit on his rep for your own purposes. Maybe better job, or a chance to teach rich kids or the like. If your teacher was a nobody who's teacher was a nobody who's teacher was famous, then you went out and made your own fame.I don't view lineage as sacred or hoity toity;
As I understand it, they have an oral tradition stating that their art came from Knightly origins but no written documentation. Their lineage is at least as solid as Wing Chun.So, if Jogo du Pau can historically identify the shift from two knightly longsword and spear to 'two handed long stick' as a distinctive discipline, with no gaps in transmission, then that counts as lineage to me. If all you have is people making the claim with no real way to support it, then you're entering into Haidong Gumdo methods of historical reckoning (no opinion on Jogo du Pau; I have no familiarity of it whatsoever).
And you can't. You take instruction from a book. You learn by doing. If you don't try it out, practice, and work against other fully resisting opponents (even in a controlled and 'safe' setting) then you don't learn. Sparring (or "Assaulting" as some in the WMA tradition call it) is an essential part of training.Without sounding flippant, this is exactly the sort of thing that induces howls of derision and cries of, 'you can't learn from a book.'