historical martial arts official topic

Users who are viewing this thread

azzarol

Sergeant
hi all i'm new in the forum thought i have been playing M&B for 2 years, well here i've seen a lot of topics regarding european
martial arts as well, so I thought about doing a unique thread about it.
For the noobs that thinks that katana is the ultimate weapon and other poor ignorant people:
try first here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_fencing
then to know how could viking do the same pattern wielding of japanese swords go there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_sword

let's talk about the weapons found in the historical manuals:
-the longsword (yes it has been lasted something like 600/700 years)
-the messer
-the dagger
-the single sword
-the azza or pollaxe
-the spear
-the sword and buckler
-the cut&thrust sidesword (with a semispherical shield called rotella or cloack or alone)
-the rapier (mostly in combination with dagger or cloack)

in my zone there is no wma school apart the rievocations associations, but they do a kind of coreographic play, so i joined the ARMA's forum thing that I suggest to anyone interested in this argument thearma.com

hope i made a good introduction.....  :roll:
 
Hello and welcome aboard.

I am not sure what you have in mind for this thread exactly. We don't tend to have a lot of katana plonkers here. Even the people on the samurai side in the viking vs samurai thread tend to have better reasons for their opinion in the debate. We actually tended to have more viking fans there.

What I can tell you is we have more than a few members with good experience of Western Martial Arts, I have learned a few things here. :smile:

Do you have a favourite weapon on that list? I am a big fan of halberds (or pollaxes), because I think they work for both the dismounted knight and the common foot soldier to great effect and are really versitile and powerful weapons.
 
well i've not managed to handle none of them but i feel that the combination between long spear and knife should be versatile (glad to see there are no noobs  :mrgreen: )
when i've seen a lot of topics about HMA  i thought that creating a place where to discuss it without creating any sort of  one vs someone but to introducing people to the knowledge of WMA (then decide to join some kind of group, so that one day a decent group of Historical Fencers will appear in my city...... this is only  secondary  :mrgreen:)
 
Kasimir said:
We don't tend to have a lot of katana plonkers here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLWzH_1eZsc&feature=channel_page
:lol:

And yes OP, the arma is a great place to learn things, at least in theory. (God I wish I had the time to go buy a proper longsword and train with guys like those...for...historical studies of course. :grin:)

Isn't most medieval instruction manuals focused on the longsword? I read (Perhaps on arma, or another place I can't remember the name of) that this might be because the weapon was so versatile that if you learnt to use it properly you pretty much learnt a lot of using other medieval weapons as well.

With such a weapon there was a lot of grappling involved as well...I can imagine that fighting with a longsword while having a dagger at hand for when you had your opponent in a hold would be very effective.
 
during duel like the harnisfechten (armored fight involved spear longsword and dagger all together) yes, the longsword was the number one, but in battle  I don't think it had the same utility like a sword and shield combination, that, unfortunatly, isn't described in manuals....

i think that extrapolating something from the I.33 and the Tallhofer should do the work  :???:
 
Wait, which time in medieval ages are we talking about? Up to 1300 I can agree that shield and sword was dominant (or probably shield and spear, shield and lance and so on, depending on your role.) but after 1300 the shield was being more and more phased out.

 
yeah the development of plate armour made shields less and less common as plate armour eliminated the need for a shield. Lightly armoured troops continued to use shields after men-at-arms and knights ceased to use them, the buckler too was used along the XVI century
 
And is used still. We had them in military for riot control or arrest help. And SWAT-teams use various shields too.
 
You know, that gives me a thought...medieval fencing is still being "rediscovered", as in people looking up what the instruction manuals actually mean and testing different techniques and all that...

But in police we have riot shields and nightsticks where they practice grappling using their nightstick and the like... Has anyone studied the history of this? Police is quite an old profession after all and every technique they use can't have been developed in the east....
 
modern riot police was inspired by romans: their square shields, beating the stick(or gladius) on the shield(or scutum) to intimidate the rioters(or barbarians :lol:), using a closed formations and sometimes chargin' together
 
The general population is not filled with swordsmen. Riot police would have much more trouble with crowd suppression otherwise. :lol:

I believe modern riot police tactics also draw a lot from the shield wall. You've usually got a bunch of them holding a line with some of them chucking assorted nasty **** (beanbag rounds, gas, etc), and a bunch of people that run out though gaps in the line to crack heads and make arrests.
 
Hehe, true. :smile:

How does mount and blade measure up to true medieval fighting then? I can accept that it's sort of right when it goes to cavalry fighting, sweeping past with sword, not standing and fighting, lances and all that... I guess it's sort of good with the horse crashing through a foe but slowing down, meaning a solid formation can stop you in your tracks...or that a braced spear is evil against a mounted man.
Of course this is not to say it's a perfect match, I only mean to say that it sort of carry the essense of the mounted combat as I understand it.

But on foot? No way, medieval fighting isn't about parry and then attack, there the parry is an attack, not to mention that there's no grappling, of course the chaotic nature of a big melee in a real battle sort of fits... :mrgreen:
 
Yeah, but the problem is that it would be very hard(if not impossible) to make the combat system anymore realistic without making it too complicated and counter-intuitive. Although I think that I'm most certainly going to use in RL some tricks I learned with bastard sword in this game(mostly ones that have to do with swing direction, momentum and attack/counterattack) :mrgreen:

And about the long sword - when you learn to use it, you've learned to use pretty much any other weapon that was used in the Middle Ages. That's why it's so predominant in WMA schools. Hell, that shows in a way even in the game - my fav melee weapon is the bastard sword precisely because of its versatility.
 
it seems that the ARMA will show a new way of interpreting HMA
http://www.thearma.org/essays/revealing-new-perspectives.html
have stil to understand wtf it should be  :???:
 
There's a much larger community doing Historical European Martial Arts than just ARMA. Among those, ARMA (or rather it's leadership) are seen as somewhat controversial.
I suggest visiting to this forum: http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/phpBB2/ if you have questions about HEMA.
 
azzarol said:
if you're talking about SCA ......  :roll:
if not what are you talking about?

Well, other groups of people practicing HEMA, like myself.
There is a large community of people doing this. Not just ARMA.
SCA does not HEMA, they ermm... I don't want to insult anyone actually so I'll say nothing more.
 
yeah, SCA is only a sword swinging like a baby with a shield  :roll:
I know about MEMAG AEMMA HEMA and so on......
but I like arma for his purposes not to intertpretating the manuals but reading them, then only with intent some strikes could
work
 
Back
Top Bottom