Hey all

I've noticed quite a few people disparage Joachim Meyer's book, and in particular, they disparage his longsword section on the basis that it is a form of school fencing geared toward the style of competitive fencing guild matches popular throughout the HRE and surrounding areas from the 16th century onward.

Despite being our most detailed and clearly spelt out source for longsword, Meyer's book isn't studied or recommended by quite a few well respected Liechtenauer researchers because in their view it isn't training for 'real life and death combat'.

This may be true, but it brings to mind the question of what our goal is in learning, practicing and teaching historical fencing in the 21st century. Why does the community dismiss so summarily and disparage any source that isn't describing (in their view) '100% life and death, white knuckle, teeth gnashing, hair pulling, sand chucking, groin kicking blood and guts combat'? Isn't historically inspired school fencing/sport fencing something entirely valid and worthwhile in it's own right, particularly for many modern reconstructionists like ourselves, trying to find a socially and legally acceptable and palatable niche for our activity?

It is a curious thing to me, because we (as in, modern, well adjusted, mentally stabile people ) have more in common with the 16th century middle class burghers who studied fencing as exercise, pastime, hobby and sport than we do with men-at-arms training for life and death war and duel in the 14th and 15th centuries. Do we fear sources like Meyer because we fear it will lead to the mess that is modern sport fencing (an ungrounded fear IMHO)?

Just a few thoughts from someone who increasingly identifies with the less lethal and more civil side of fencing practice.

Cheers

Bill

__________________
Bill Carew
Collegium in armis
http://www.collegiuminarmis.com.au
AD FONTES

Since the age of four I wanted to learn medieval era martial arts. I cannot give a reason why.

As for Joachim Meyer, my serious studies of the German system began with the translation of Sigmund Ringeck by Joerg Bellighausen back in the nineties. I would have studied Meyer had he been available, but as such hasn't been available until fairly recently so it comes a bit late. Given he is a bit different from the rest of the German corpus he simply doesn't fit in with what I'm studying in the main (not that I ignore him).

So for me it wasn't because Meyer wasn't about '100% life and death, white knuckle, teeth gnashing, hair pulling, sand chucking, groin kicking blood and guts combat', but he was Renaissance and the translation came a bit late in the peace.

(Not that I don't study and practice Renaissance martial arts, but back in the nineties I was mostly interested the medieval material, even though hypocritically I studied Silver and diGrassi and a smiden of Saviolo...but only because they were in English.)

I agree fully with you here. I see Meyer as being just as valid as Ringeck or Fiore for HES study.

However, as an Ernstfechten Liechtenauer fanboy I rarely turn to Meyer. I guess there are 2 main reasons for this.

Firstly, for me to study something like HES, I must be interested in the context that surrounds the style and I take only a passing interest in post-1500 history. Asides from the ridiculous costumes depicted in Meyer's book, I am not sure why this is. Perhaps things begin to get too 'modern' for me. Having said that, I don't want to be a 15th Century knight, nor copy their entire social code, I am just interested in the period.

Secondly, learning an art, of which one of its purposes was a 'men-at-arms life or death fight', appeals to me more than the hardcore sport of Meyer. I first started HEMA when in the army, and initially approached it with a 21st century soldier's mindset. My approach has 'matured' somewhat now, but I still prefer an art that can be used in life or death situations. I see it as more of a challenge, i.e. to train and condition oneself for such a serious conflict. I enjoy freeplay when the whole body target and wide range of techniques are allowed, as opposed to the limited targets of Meyer's time. Again, more of a challenge and whole body experience for me. I would like to mention that I see many less-lethal techniques within manuals such as Ringeck's and Von Danzig's, and that it's not all about 'life and death' for me.



Personally, I wouldn't mind a sport version of HES, if done correctly.

__________________
Regards,

Matt

http://fechtkunst.wordpress.com/
http://laches.wordpress.com/

"It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife, the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight, mates, in your quilted chambray nightshirts."

Hear hear I like Meyer & am surprised when the same people say both, it's just sports fencing and some of it is a bit scary