Hi Guys,
Ok, a big thread, but I thought I'd make some comment on the pertinent points.
1) Knowledge. Yes both researching and fighting ability are needed, and as Stu points out, they are hard to find in the same person - particularly as good natural fighters have enough timing, distance and conditioning to escape the need for rigorous interpretation of technique(!). But you can find them all within a particular club, so all is not lost, and it is just the nature of the art as this stage - it's still very much in a discovery process.
2) Politics: Stu's observations are probably about right. Different aims, different approaches, and the inability to convey these verbally over the net, leads to all sorts of fireworks. But I gotta say it used to be worse!
3) Certification. Very bad idea, IMHO. A classical fencing lineage can be a useful thing for some arts, but useless for others, and no guarantee of either research or fighting ability. Same goes for EMA experience, or wrestling background, or whatever. Word of mouth within the community from people you respect is by far the best way to get a bead on who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't.
4) Lineage. Not as worthwhile as it may sound. One of the strengths of HWMA is that they aren’t living lineages – they were “frozen” at the moment of maximum utility, by people who actually used them. Not dishing on Classical fencers or people who do have living lineages, which certainly can preserve subtleties lost on the printed page, but equally when it comes down to it the lineage is the manual. I can, for example, talk George Silver with chaps I’ve never met on the other side of the planet, and despite differences in interpretation we are all basically doing similar things.
5) “Working from manuals: I just don't see how someone can work entirely from a manual and a hodge-podge of previous MA experience and pass themselves off as a teacher.”
Well, I’m like that, except I’ve had NO previous MA experience (!). Note that “working from manuals” doesn’t equate to “not really doing it”, and you have to realize what an incredibly rich source the European manuals are. Everything you need to know is in there somewhere, if you have the time and talent to see it (which as previously noted, isn’t particularly common)
6) “A lot of these guys feel like their research will be polluted if they hook up with mainstream combative sport, methinks.”
Exactly, and this is fair enough. Sometimes hooking up with living traditions can be really useful – but it’s a big mistake to think that there’s only one way of doing things, or that because something looks a bit like modern fencing / kendo / sport wrestling / whatever, that it actually IS the same. Often it’s not, and using alien traditions to “fill in the blanks” really can screw your understanding of stuff. What’s more useful is to do as much as you can in isolation, then see if anything out there is very similar and might be able to provide new insights.
This also depends heavily on the art in question. Can you get useful – perhaps vital – help from MMA to help figure out medieval wrestling? Of course. Can you get useful help from classical fencing for rapier? Of course! Can either help with medieval longsword? Much less so. Is kenjistsu useful for medieval longsword? Maybe, but maybe it will send you down the wrong path entirely.
7) “Without this sporting aspect there is no good way of testing practitioners.”
I agree entirely here, and am working on getting a combat sport version of backsword up and running :)
8) “I dunno Stu , i thought performance = accuracy, being able to perform the stuff at speed against non-cooperative opponents is the idea isn't it?”
I agree entirely that the historically accurate methods SHOULD be the most effective, but you also have to take into account the accuracy of bouting systems i.e. something that works fine with steel may not be so effective with boffers or shinai – and also the conditions under which the art was originally taught and practiced. A classic example would be Italian rapier, developed and taught before there were fencing masks, etc. They couldn’t practice it hammer-and-tongs they way we can, and didn’t. When you DO practice it hammer-and-tongs, it can get very messy and the “historically accurate” techniques don’t always “work”, whereas other tricks might. This is where you have to be clear as to you aim - to recreate the art as it was originally done (perfectly valid of course) or to have a full fledged performance-oriented combat sport (also perfectly valid)?
9) “I have been meaning to get a copy of Stephen Hands I33 sword and shield work”
Hey! I’m first author on that! :)
Paul