WMA and HEMA

OP
K

Keith Jennings

Guest
Come on guys, this was actually a pretty good conversation. Let’s not turn it into this. While I don’t think that Matt knows what he’s talking about in regards to later-period swordplay, I honestly believe that he wasn’t trying to be a Troll. This is an open forum, and both sides should be allowed to express their views without perceiving it as an attack.

 

Christopher Umbs

Yellow Belt
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
49
Reaction score
4
Location
Summit, NJ USA
Keith,

In general, I don't know who's who in ARMA and I don't usually read threads dealing with older weapons since it's not my main interest. So it took me a few days to remember who Matt is. I went back and read the messages from ARMAs private mailing list that were hacked and made public a while back - that reminded me that he's been talking about this (hating the fact that M. Martinez is called a master, etc.) since 2002 and isn't really interested in having his mind changed.

Chris
 

KenpoTess

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
10,329
Reaction score
45
Location
Somewhere Wild,Wonderful and Wicked
Mod Note

Please return to the original thread Topic and feel free to use the Ignore button for members you wish not to read. If there's an issue you are having with a member or post, use the Report Bad post button.

Bringing other Forums' issues to MT is not acceptable.

Thank you,

~Tess
-MT S. Mod
 
OP
M

Matt Anderson

Guest
Christopher Umbs said:
Matt,

Either you don't know what you're talking about or you're just being a troll.
Nope, just offereing a different opinion. When you say

"One downside to having so many printed treatises available to us though is the tendency of some groups to try to learn simply from the books even when there are living traditions. Other arts may be 'dead', but I still think one would be better served by studying a LT of Grand Baton before trying to work their way through a longsword treatise".

You are criticizing the approach virtually everyone in the historical fencing community is taking. From what I've seen, most of these "living traditons" are undocumentable past one or two generations, are watered down versions of their medieval and renaissance origins, and are therefore mostly modern interpretation anyway. I'm not posting here to try and change your mind, just pointing out to other readers of this forum, who may not know much about the subject, that yours is not the only viewpoint on this issue nor is yours the only valid approach to studying these arts.
 
OP
M

Matt Anderson

Guest
Keith Jennings said:
Come on guys, this was actually a pretty good conversation. Let’s not turn it into this. While I don’t think that Matt knows what he’s talking about in regards to later-period swordplay, I honestly believe that he wasn’t trying to be a Troll. This is an open forum, and both sides should be allowed to express their views without perceiving it as an attack.

Well frankly, you're right, I'm not trolling, and later period stuff is certainly not my area of expertise. Also, I'm not really disputing the skill of late period fencers (although it may have sounded that way). What I really disagree with is the belief by many in the classical fencing community that unless you study with a recognized "master" in a living tradition of some kind, your historical fencing study is somehow less legitimate.
 
OP
K

Keith Jennings

Guest
Christopher Umbs said:
Keith,

In general, I don't know who's who in ARMA and I don't usually read threads dealing with older weapons since it's not my main interest. So it took me a few days to remember who Matt is. I went back and read the messages from ARMAs private mailing list that were hacked and made public a while back - that reminded me that he's been talking about this (hating the fact that M. Martinez is called a master, etc.) since 2002 and isn't really interested in having his mind changed.

Chris
Hi Chris,

I’m afraid that I don’t know anything about any of that. I’m just taking all of this at face value, and I really don’t think anyone is being a Troll here. I see people with different points of view, and while I agree that it is evident that Matt doesn’t study 19th century fencing, I also don’t think he has been rude about it. Believe me, I realize there is a lot of bad blood in the WMA community (you and I were both at the first WMAW in 1999, so we’ve seen it from the beginning) but I personally don’t try to take anything too personally.

 
OP
K

Keith Jennings

Guest
Matt Anderson said:
Well frankly, you're right, I'm not trolling, and later period stuff is certainly not my area of expertise. Also, I'm not really disputing the skill of late period fencers (although it may have sounded that way). What I really disagree with is the belief by many in the classical fencing community that unless you study with a recognized "master" in a living tradition of some kind, your historical fencing study is somehow less legitimate.
Matt,

Yes, I most definitely don’t agree with that statement. But, like I said to Chris, there were no personal attacks, so there is no reason to take anything personally. Of course, I don’t take offense easily, and when you’re a member of the WMA community, IMO that is a good trait to have :rolleyes:

As for Chris’ opinion that you would be better prepared to study historical long sword by first studying a Living Tradition, all the evidence I’ve seen points to the contrary. Chris has admitted that the long sword really isn’t an area of interest for him, and his views reflect that. Still, if that truly is his opinion, he’s free to have it, and I would be interested in hearing his argument. Personally, I don’t see it.



Anyone who has ever spent a significant time with the medieval treatises would realize that a background in a grappling art (such as jujitsu, or shoot-wresting) would be a thousand times more beneficial than training in later period swordplay. My own focus is Fior di Battaglia, and Fiore bases his entire art on grappling, and that should be the students base before learning the use of weapons. This wrestling base affects the body mechanics for the entire system, and when I see classically trained fencers attempt to apply the body mechanics they’ve learned to early weapon systems, things go wrong.

However, I am a firm believer that it is necessary to have a solid martial art background, or availability to an instructor, in order to successfully research/train historical fencing. I have heard people give aspiring swordsmen with no previous marital art experience the advice to buy a waster, buy a book, and get to training. This is a set up for failure at best, and irresponsible at worse. Classical fencing, traditional Eastern martial arts, modern combatives, and Western wrestling all make excellent backgrounds to begin the study of historical fencing. Some are better than others, but all can be beneficial.

So, that is my opinion on this subject. I hope that no one takes any of this as a personal attack, and I look forward to hearing alternative points of view.







 
OP
M

Matt Anderson

Guest
Keith Jennings said:
Matt,

Yes, I most definitely don’t agree with that statement. But, like I said to Chris, there were no personal attacks, so there is no reason to take anything personally. Of course, I don’t take offense easily, and when you’re a member of the WMA community, IMO that is a good trait to have :rolleyes:

As for Chris’ opinion that you would be better prepared to study historical long sword by first studying a Living Tradition, all the evidence I’ve seen points to the contrary. Chris has admitted that the long sword really isn’t an area of interest for him, and his views reflect that. Still, if that truly is his opinion, he’s free to have it, and I would be interested in hearing his argument. Personally, I don’t see it.



Anyone who has ever spent a significant time with the medieval treatises would realize that a background in a grappling art (such as jujitsu, or shoot-wresting) would be a thousand times more beneficial than training in later period swordplay. My own focus is Fior di Battaglia, and Fiore bases his entire art on grappling, and that should be the students base before learning the use of weapons. This wrestling base affects the body mechanics for the entire system, and when I see classically trained fencers attempt to apply the body mechanics they’ve learned to early weapon systems, things go wrong.

However, I am a firm believer that it is necessary to have a solid martial art background, or availability to an instructor, in order to successfully research/train historical fencing. I have heard people give aspiring swordsmen with no previous marital art experience the advice to buy a waster, buy a book, and get to training. This is a set up for failure at best, and irresponsible at worse. Classical fencing, traditional Eastern martial arts, modern combatives, and Western wrestling all make excellent backgrounds to begin the study of historical fencing. Some are better than others, but all can be beneficial.

So, that is my opinion on this subject. I hope that no one takes any of this as a personal attack, and I look forward to hearing alternative points of view.





Yep, I agree with everything you've said here. I don't have anything personal against Chris or anyone else and didn't take anything said here as a personal insult either. BTW, I bet Fiore would kick butt in UFC or Pride!
 

Ran Pleasant

White Belt
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Matt Anderson said:
I bet Fiore would kick butt in UFC or Pride!
Well, us ARMA DFW guys might just have to dump you on your Fiore butt at your Senior Free Scholar prize play next week.:jedi1:
Of course, we might all have to attack at the same time in order to accomplish the task.:2xBird2:

Looking forward to your class.:duel:
 
OP
M

Matt Anderson

Guest
Ran Pleasant said:
Well, us ARMA DFW guys might just have to dump you on your Fiore butt at your Senior Free Scholar prize play next week.:jedi1:
Of course, we might all have to attack at the same time in order to accomplish the task.:2xBird2:

Looking forward to your class.:duel:
Ran, if you guys have any compassion at all, you'll take it easy on me, I'm really quite old and frail you know.

DSCF0008.jpg
 

Ran Pleasant

White Belt
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
So...is that the "old age" or the "frail" you are using in the picture to dump Shane.:whip:

By the way, I think I have you in this old age and frail stuff by 10 to 15 years, serval thousand gray hairs, and way too many pounds.:vu: :vu:
 

Dwight McLemore

Orange Belt
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
66
Reaction score
13
Matt & Chris.

Side-Bar...... The last time Maestro Martinez and I talked about 'Pepe' Llula we had same few sources that I did. Dueling in Old New Orleans & Gentlemen Swords & Pistols both 1950ish questionable sources. He made a trip to New Orleans and did some research there and tried to get a meeting with the family but no real positive results or anything new. Do any of you guys have any new information or sources on this unique individual.

Best
Dwight
 

lklawson

Senior Master
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
4,565
Reaction score
1,262
Location
Huber Heights, OH
Silat Student said:
I'd like any info that you have. I've googled a bit but haven't turned up much (perhaps it's just my ineptitude).
Sorry I took so long to get back to ya.

Start off with Ken Pfrenger's website.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/4933/shillelagh.html

I've also got a couple of video tapes including a video of Ken's shillelah class at the recent Cumann Bhata Western Martial Arts Seminar. PayPal $15 to lawson@dayton.net for to-your-door shipping within the contiguous U.S. Be sure to include your shipping address and a note for what video(s) you want. I also got video of the other classes too. Same deal. I think I posted additional details in the Marketplace forum.

All together that should answer all of your basic questions.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 
Top