Fencing, martial art or no

Discussion in 'The European Art of Fencing' started by KnightlyMongoose, Jul 10, 2007.

  1. Tez3

    Tez3 Sr. Grandmaster

    • Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    24,664
    Likes Received:
    3,701
    Trophy Points:
    308
    Location:
    England
    Try riding horses. A sword doesn't have a mind of it's own, it's takes great stength of character to become a top class equestrian. I'm not even getting into all the other occupations/pursuits that will give you strength of character, swordsmanship is only one of many. Swordswomanship too I imagine.
     
  2. Large Fierce Mammal

    Large Fierce Mammal White Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    I agree that horsemanship can be a wonderful character builder. I myself am a dog behaviourist specializing in resolution of aggression cases. Believe me, I understand what constitutes a healthy, stable bond between human and animal. With all due respect however, the issue addressed by this thread is not whether horsemanship or dog handling are martial arts - the issue is fencing. From that perspective, I agree with you that the sword doesn't have a mind of its own, but in fencing, your adversary does. Riding is an art based on harmony with another creature; fencing on harmony with yourself, expressed through the weapon.
     
  3. kempodisciple

    kempodisciple Senior Master

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    2,877
    Likes Received:
    652
    Trophy Points:
    213
    Location:
    New York
    I see no reason why even sport fencing shouldn't be considered a martial art. If you take away the blunted tips or edge, then your learning to stab/cut the other person without getting stabbed/cut yourself. And just because with the safety precautions its not lethal doesnt mean it cant be lethal. Take people sparring with headgear chest protectors and sparring gloves. Still learniing how to fight, just without hurting people.Whether its effective or not, no one would dare say its not a martial art, and its the same for fencing
     
  4. lklawson

    lklawson Senior Master

    • Advisor
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Likes Received:
    763
    Trophy Points:
    213
    Location:
    Huber Heights, OH
    You sure about that? It's already been discussed in this thread (back in '07).


    I've actually seen people say exactly that. And they've been saying it for centuries.

    "Some said he was an argument against the Ring: that he should'nt be let loose against a fightin' sportsman. That he fought like wild beast. That he never knew when to lay off. He hated gloves. Why go to all the trouble to pickle your hands in Tom Sayer's brew of turps, whiskey vinegar, horse radish and saltpetre, if ye were goin' to cover them up? Ye were supposed to use your hands to hurt him, not protect him."
    -"Claret and Cross-Buttock" by Joe Robinson

    Tom Sayer was a bare knuckle boxer who died just after the U.S. Civil War ended.

    The point is that this is not exactly a new debate. ;)

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  5. kempodisciple

    kempodisciple Senior Master

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    2,877
    Likes Received:
    652
    Trophy Points:
    213
    Location:
    New York
    Oh, i know its not a new debate, figured I might stir it up again :angel: And I should probably clarify: people would dare say it's not a martial art, however, no one can (IMO) CORRECTLY say it's not a martial art
     
  6. Daniel Sullivan

    Daniel Sullivan Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    6,472
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Olney, Maryland
    Having spent a number of years fencing foil and epee, practicing kendo, some kenjutsu, and practicing rapier fencing with and SCA group, I will say that protective gear or it's lack is not the issue.

    The fact that sport fencing does not require you to cut or thrust correctly in any manner whatsoever (you can score in sabre with the flat or even the back of the blade and you can make a modern foil or epee whip and bend in ways that you would not want a dueling weapon to) and has been noted earlier in the thread, strategies that would be suicidal in an actual duel are utilized to win matches.

    While kendo certainly is removed from actual dueling, it requires you to cut correctly, with the correct part of the sword, and incorporates other elements that keep it tied to its martial roots that sport fencing does not. While kata do not make something a martial art, the kendo kata are certainly 'martial' in their methodology, mindset, and execution.

    While SCA fencing is also removed from a 'real' duel, and I have no opinion on it being a martial art or no, it does use dull steel weapons and the weapons are treated as actual weapons.

    Finally, sport fencing is based on civilian dueling, not military (martial) sword work, on a semantic level, it would miss the mark as well.

    Personally, I have no opinion on the matter. Sport fencing is fun, athletic, and has a wonderful history, and it is one of the first sports in the Olympics. However, sport fencers overwhelmingly say that it is not a martial art. Those that do not say it isn't are indifferent. I used to post on f.net and every time anyone made mention of it being a martial art, the overwhelming response was disagreement. Given that those who practice sport fencing do not consider it an MA, I think your statement in your follow up post,
    Is incorrect; it can be correctly said that it is not a martial art, and is said by the majority of those who practice the art in question. The fact that a counter argument can be made doesn't change this.

    Classical/historical fencing, however would in my opinion fall into the category of martial art. This fact does not make it superior to sport fencing; simply a different flavor of fencing. I once saw it said on a classical fencing forum that a modern sport fencer does have all of the essential tools to fight a duel.

    Take that for what it's worth.
     
  7. Dirty Dog

    Dirty Dog MT Senior Moderator Staff Member

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    13,938
    Likes Received:
    2,962
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Pueblo West, CO
    Any 'combat' that doesn't use real, sharp weapons to inflict real wounds is going to be removed from a 'real' duel. That being said, I'll say that SCA rapier varies widely from one area to another, and within a given area there are those who make a serious study of period manuals and attempt to use real techniques, and those who just hold the big end and try to poke their opponent with the small end.

    In areas that use schalger and both the edge and point, I think a legitimate martial art can be practiced.
     
  8. Daniel Sullivan

    Daniel Sullivan Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    6,472
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Olney, Maryland
    Of course. Just as much as two sweaty guys in a dojang/dojo/cage/ring/octagon are going to be removed from a "real fight."

    Pretty much true of every art. You will always have people who seek to learn the fine detail and try to use authentic techniques or to continually improve their technique and deepen their understanding of the art, and there will be those who will just aim their striking surfaces at their opponent and hope for the best.

    Edge and point or just point, given that not all fencing swords were cut and thrust weapons.
     
  9. lklawson

    lklawson Senior Master

    • Advisor
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Likes Received:
    763
    Trophy Points:
    213
    Location:
    Huber Heights, OH
    Umm... Backcut?


    We'll just have to disagree on this. The fact that you say it ain't or even claim that "most" who practice it say it ain't doesn't change the fact that the vast majority, if further asked, will happily agree that boxing is quite effective as a self defense "system," "tool," or whatever. Just because the verbiage changes doesn't mean that they intent does. Heck, for generations boxing was considered the art of self defense, even by the time gloves were commonly used. I can point you to any number of boxing manuals (many of which I've republished) which say as much.

    Whether you name it "martial art" or just use the functional definition is irrelevant.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  10. Daniel Sullivan

    Daniel Sullivan Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    6,472
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Olney, Maryland
    Not thinking of any specific cut; only that a touch with the blade scores. So far as I know (correct me if I am wrong), the refs will not penalize you or negate your point if you touch with a part other than the edge or point or with any portion of the blade, so long as the cut or thrust lands on the torso, arms, hands, or mask.

    Fully agree. That wasn't what I meant in my response to Kempodisciple. What I was getting at was that you can "correctly" argue both sides.

    Absolutely, which is why I am of no opinion on the matter. :)
     
  11. Dirty Dog

    Dirty Dog MT Senior Moderator Staff Member

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    13,938
    Likes Received:
    2,962
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Pueblo West, CO
    Not all, certainly. But my comments were specifically about SCA rapier, and I don't think the smallsword was in common use during the SCA period.
     
  12. Daniel Sullivan

    Daniel Sullivan Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    6,472
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Olney, Maryland
    Not sure on that, but probably more at the tail end.
     
  13. Dirty Dog

    Dirty Dog MT Senior Moderator Staff Member

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    13,938
    Likes Received:
    2,962
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Pueblo West, CO
    Quick check of both my memory and the SCA website says their time period is Pre-17th Century. Smallswords seem to have been in common use from about the mid-17th Century. Of course, being in 'common use' implies at least some degree of use prior to that date, but how much prior I have not been able to discover (in an admittedly brief search for answers...).

    How about I amend my statement and say that when training with the rapier (a cut and thrust weapon), practitioners who use schlager blades and employ both the point and the edge can certainly be considered to be practicing a martial art. :)
     
  14. lklawson

    lklawson Senior Master

    • Advisor
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Likes Received:
    763
    Trophy Points:
    213
    Location:
    Huber Heights, OH
    I wasn't so much speaking to the rules which allow any touch but rather saying that hitting with the back of the blade shouldn't be considered evidence of lack of martial skill because the Backcut was a standard technique, even with Dueling Sabre and the razor edge on Dueling Sabres would ensure that even a light touch would be sufficient to draw blood. I agree that scoring with the flat is a step away from usefulness in a duel.


    Then I guess I misunderstood what you were saying. My mistake. Carry on. :)

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  15. Daniel Sullivan

    Daniel Sullivan Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    6,472
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Olney, Maryland
    Not a lack of martial skill; simply a lack of emphasis on the quality of the cut inherent in the scoring system. I think that Olympic sabreurs have tremendous athletic and martial skill, and could easily adapt to a more historical/classical set of rules.

    My comment was more about the focus of sport fencing being to score a touch than to retain authenticity of technique. Lets face it; the flexibility of modern blades allows one to score by whipping the blade into a u-turn and score with a touch that would not only not injure an opponent, but would likely not penetrate even a light jacket, even if it were sharp. I'm not being critical of this, by the way; simply pointing out that strategies have evolved to take advantage of the realities of the rules and equipment as they are today.

    My opinion is that FIE fencing is FIE fencing. If you want something different, there are other flavors of fencing out there. Classification as a martial art or not a martial art is an academic argument that few, if any FIE fencers even care about.

    Personally, I find FIE (sport) fencing very enjoyable,physically challenging, and full of good people that are fun to be around. The cost of entry into the sport is fairly low; you can get a Leon Paul FIE rated Olympic quality set of electric gear for the cost of fairly low end kendo gear, and entry level fencing gear is well within the reach of people of any economic background.

    In all, I think fencing is a wonderful sport/art/pastime/science/whatever else it can be classified as, regardless of what flavor one chooses. :)
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
fancing martial arts
,
fencing as a martial art
,
fencing is better than martial arts
,
fencing martial art
,
fencing martial arts
,
fencing vs martial arts
,
fercing martial art
,
is fencing a combat styles
,

is fencing a martial art

,
is fencing martial arts
,

is olympic fencing a martial art

,
those fencing is martial arts
,
train no 52263 live status