Posted On:5/22/2009 10:07am
someone needs a nap
Posted On:5/22/2009 10:16am
This doesn't negate the FACT you changed your argument. This is a very interesting thread. I have learned much. Especially, that the problems of politics is in every style from the laughable to the respected.
Originally Posted by doofaloofa
Posted On:5/22/2009 8:34pm
Style: Renaissance Martial Arts
I think everyone accusing me of "changing my argument" needs to reread this post:
"Excuse me, by that I didn't mean a school as in a building, obviously there are schools where they have been teaching fencing continuously since that time period. I meant "School" as in the method of instruction has remained along a constant lineage, and the methodologies and teachings have been preserved in institutional memory since the Renaissance, and that simply does not exist. There are no living lineage's of fencing instruction that maintain a continuous line of instruction in fencing methodologies from the Renaissance to the present."
This is continuously what I have been arguing all along. Buildings and institutions from the Renaissance obviously have survived to today. Directly transmitted teachings on fencing have not. Methods of warfare changed and the older methods were abandoned. This is what I have been saying the entire time. If anybody wants to contradict me please go find me a fencing master who can legitimately instruct me in the same methods of instruction of Renaissance Europe. Such a person cannot be found, that is why these arts have to be revived and reconstructed. I will continue to argue this, and this is mine and bludhalls/Mike Cartier's main point. I whipped out the capslock, because you pissed me off when accusing me of being the same person as my friend, who happens to be an individual who I know in real life and respect. We are not the same person, we have the same line of argumentation because we have the same views, and have the same sort of background in the same art. I'm tired of arguing with people who have no scholarly background in our art, and who's core assumptions are way off in cloud-cuckoo-land.
If any of you wish to argue this point further, I invite you all to the forums at
or the forums at:
At least people there know what they are talking about when it comes to this subject.
In the meantime I'm tired of the Bullshido at Bullshido.
Posted On:5/23/2009 6:15pm
Originally Posted by Zwerchhau
Just because Europeans diluted their martial traditions into a tag-play-sport does not mean these lineages are valid "martial traditions" you admit yourself that they "don't do that anymore"
I think you need to reconsider how you define 'European martial traditions' since many European martial traditions and combative disciplines and sports have not been diluted at all and many survive fully intact in living lineages today.
Here's a short list: Savate, Wresting (Catch, Collar and elbow, Greco-Roman, Cornish, Glima, Lucha Canaria, Schwingen etc), Boxing, Purring, Le Couteau, Jogo do Pau, Juego del Palo Canario, La Canne and Baton, Bastone (di Scherma, Genovese, Siciliano), Shillelagh and Bata, Makila and Zipota, Khridoli and last but not least Classical Fencing. There are many more.
We sometimes overlook the rich surviving European martial heritage as a result of a sword-centric view of WMA or HEMA, but martial traditions are about more than just swords, and some of the arts above possibly date back to (or at least, have antecendents in) the Renaissance. Certainly, most of them can be reliably dated at least as far back as the 18th and 19th centuries.
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info